DKIWUTMI  VI    OF    AGRICULTURE. 

OFFICi  iN  N,K  W' 


IRRIGATION  FROM  Bid  THOMPSON  RIVER. 


JOHN   E.   FIEL^ 

[iisidunt  Mai*    I. 

otoradj. 


d5»x-->W'^T- 


;,  >,fogi^ 


DEPOSITORY 


WASHINGTON: 

GOVERNMENT    PRINTING    OFtflQE. 

1  902. 


LIST  OF  PUBLICATIONS   OF  THE  OFFICE  OF  EXPERIMENT  STATIONS  ON 

IRRIGATION." 

Bui.    36.   Notes  on  Irrigation  in  Connecticut  and  New  Jersey.     By  C.  S.  Phelps  and 

F.  P>.  Vobrhees.     Pp.  (>-F     Price,  10  cents. 
Bui.    58.   Water  Rights  on  the  Missouri  Riverand  its  Tributaries.     ByElwood  Mead. 

Pp.  80.      Price.   II)  cent-. 
Bui.    60.   jLbstractof  Laws  for  Acquiring  Titles  to  Water,  froni  t  lie  .Missouri  River  and 

its  Tributaries,  with  the  Legal  Forms  in  ( tee.    <  lompiled  by  Elwood  Mead. 

Pp.  77.     Price,  L0  cents. 
Bui.    70.  Water-Righl  Problemsof  Bear-River.     By  Clarence  T.  Johnston  and  Joseph 

A.   I  .reckons.      1*}).  40.      Price.   15  cents. 
Bul.    73.   Irrigation  in the  Rocky  Mountain  '.States'.     By  J.  C.  Olrich.    Pp.64.    Pi 

10  cents. 

Bul.    81.  The  Use  of  Water  in  Irrigation  in  Wyoming.     By  I!.  ('.  Buffum.     Pp.  56. 

Price,  10  cents. 
Bul.    S(>.  The  Use  of  Water  in  Irrigation.      Report  of  investigations  made  in   i 

under  the  supervision  of  Klwood  Mead,  expert  in  charge,  and  C.  T.  .Join  - 

ston,  assistant.      Pp.  263.      Price,  30  cents. 
Bul.     87.    Irrigation   in    New  Jersey.      By    Kdward    B.  Yoorhees.      Pp.    40.     Price.    5 

cents. 
Bul.    90.  Irrigation  in  Hawaii.     P>y  Walter  Maxwell.     Pp.48.     Price,  10  cents. 
Bul.    92.  The  Reservoir  System  ot'  the  Cache  la  Poiidre  Valley.      By  E. S.  Nettletott. 

Pj).  4S.      Price,   15  cents. 
Bul.    96.  Irrigation  Laws  of  the  Northwest  Territories  of  Canada  and  Wyoming,  with 

Discussions  by  J.  S.  Dennis,   Fred    Pond,  and  J.  M.  Wilson.     Pp.  90. 

Price,  10  cents. 
Bul.  100.   Report   of   Irrigation   Investigations  in  California,   under  the  direction  of 

Klwood  Mead,  assisted  by  William   K.  Smythe,  Marsden  Manson,  J.  M. 

Wilson,  Charles  D.  Marx,  Frank  Soule,  C.  E.  (irunsky,  Edward  M.  B 

and  .lames   1)    '    '.  uvler.      Pp.411.     Price,  cloth,  si.  25;   paper,  9[^        it< 
Bul.  104.  Thel'seof  r  in v±  «igation,     Report  of  investigations  mut(je  m   |,)()() 

under  supervision  o.  v'\\ood  Mead.  expert  in  charge     lU(|  ^  r£  j()]in^ 

^    ,.,  assistant.      Pp.  3B4.      .  -wv,  50  cents. 
Bul.  105.    '    Ration  in   the   United   States  -..vol    F      ood  Meadj  irrigatipn 

expert  m  charge,  before  the  United   States    limastrial   Commission  June 

11  and  12,  1901.     Pp.  47,     Price,  15  cents;. 

Bul.  10S.  Irrigation   Practice  among   Fruit  ( irowers  on  the   Pacific  Coast.      Bv  E    J 

Wickson.     Pp.  54.     Price,  15  cents. 
Bul.  113.  Irrigation  ol  Rice  in  the  Inited  States.      Bv  Frank  Bond  and  George  H 

Keeney.      Pp.  77.      In  press. 

lAK.MKKs'     BULLETINS. 

Pan.      In.    irrigation  in  Humid  (Miniates.      P,v  F.   1 1.   Kin-       Pp.27 

'""I.  m.   lirig;,tion  in  Fruit  Growing.     P,v  E.  .1.  Wirkson.     Pp,  48 

P>ul.   i;5S.    Irrigation  in  Field  and  Garden.      By  F.  J.  Wicks,,,,.      Pp   40 

Bul.  158.    II, )U    to   Build  Small    Irrigation   Ditches.      By  C.  T.  Johnston  and  J     I) 

Stannard.      pp.  28. 

"  For  !h„^  puhheations  to  Which  a  price  is  atlixed  application  should  he  made  to 
t !«■  SnponoM.dent  of  Documents,  I'nioii  IUiiMing,  Washington,  D.  Q.,  the  officer 
designated  l»y  Jaw  to  sell  Gfrovernmenl  publications. 


s 


U.  S.  Dept.  of  At-r  ,  Bu!    1  18    Office  of  Expt.  Stations.     Irrigation  Instigations.  FRONTISPIECE 


\\ 

mtestigkti 

VJ 


U.  S.  DEPARTMENT   OP    AGRICULTURE. 

OFFICE  OF  EXPERIMENT  STATIONS-BULLETIN  NO.  118. 

A.  C.  TRUE,   Director. 


liUIGATION  FROM  BIG  THOMPSON  RIVER. 


BY 


JOHN   E.   FIELD, 

Assistant  State  Engineer  of  Colorado. 


WASHINGTON: 

GOVEKNMENT    PRINTING    OFFICE. 
1902. 


OFFICE  OF  EXPERIMENT  STATIONS. 

A.  C.  True,  Ph.  D.,  Director. 

E.  W.  Allen,  Ph.  D.,  Assistant  Director. 

[rbigation  investigations. 

Elwood  Mead,  ( '; 

( !.  T.  Johnston,  Assistant  <  '/■ 

J.  M.  Wilson.  ■  <j<  of  Calif  ornia  Oft 

R.  P.  Teele,  Editorial  Assistant. 

Clarence  E.  Tait.  Assistant  in  Chargi  of  Maps  and  Ittustrai 

A.  P.  Stover.  . 

J.  D.  Stannard,  Assistant. 

Frank  Adams,  Agent  and  Expert 

Frank  Bond,  Agent  and  Expert 


LETTER  OF  TRANSMITTAL. 


U.  S.  Department  of  Agmoultubb, 

Office  of  Experiment  Stations. 

Washington,  I).  C,  June  16,  1002. 
Sir:  I  have  the  honor  to  .submit  for  publication  a  report  on  irriga- 
tion from  Big  Thompson  River,  Colorado,  prepared  under  the  direc- 
tion of  Prof.  Elwood  Mead,  expert  in  charge  of  irrigation  investiga- 
tions, by  John  E.  Field,  assistant  State  engineer  of  that  State. 

The  farmers  of  northern  Colorado  have  made  a  more  complete  use 
of  their  water  supply  than  is  made  in  any  other  part  of  the  United 
States  except  California.  This  development  has  brought  out  many 
interesting  features  in  the  practical  workings  of  the  Colorado  system 
of  water  laws.  The  report  deals  largely  with  the  legal  status  of  water 
rights  in  the  Big  Thompson  Valley,  and  in  the  State  of  Colorado  as  a 
whole. 

Mr.  Field's  official  connection  with  water  administration  in  Colo- 
rado makes  him  especially  well  qualified  to  discuss  this  subject.  It  is 
through  studies  of  this  character  that  the  people  of  Colorado  and  of 
the  West  can  perfect  their  irrigation  systems  and  secure  the  highest 
development  of  their  resources. 

It  is  recommended  that  this  report  be  published  as  a  bulletin  of  this 
Office. 

Respectfully,  A.  C.  True, 

Director. 
Hon.  James  Wilson, 

Secretary  of  Agriculture. 

3 


CONTENTS. 


Introduction 9 

Physical  characteristics 11 

Water  supply 12 

1  titches  ----- IS 

The  Bijr  Thompson  Ditch 20 

Mariano  Ditch 21 

The  Big  Thompson  Manufacturing  Company's  Ditch 21 

The  Farmers'  Irrigating  Ditch 23 

The  Big  Thompson  Irrigating  Ditch 28 

The  Loveland  and  Greeley  Canal 24 

The  Big  Thompson  and  Platte  River  Ditch 25 

Kist  and  Goss  I  >it<h 26 

Hill  and  Brush  Ditch 26 

The  London  Ditch 26 

The  ( reorge  Rist  Ditch 27 

The  Hillsboro  Ditch 27 

The  I  landy  Ditch 28 

The  South  Side  Ditch 29 

The  Home  Supply  Ditch 29 

Reservoirs 30 

Reservoirs  under  the  Loveland  and  Greeley  Canal 35 

Lake  Loveland 35 

The  Big  Cut  Reservoir 37 

Darrough  Lake 37 

The  Sanborn  reservoirs,  Nos.  1  and  2 37 

Reservoirs  under  the  Loudon  Ditch 38 

Benson  Lake 38 

The  Bental 38 

Seven  Lakes,  Loudon  and  Boyd  lakes 38 

Reservoirs  under  the  Handy  Ditch 40 

Frank  Loveland  Reservoir 40 

The  De  France  Reservoir 40 

The  Kee  Reservoir 40 

The  Brown  Reservoir 40 

The  Wilson  Reservoir _ 41 

The  Hupp  Lake  Reservoir 41 

The  Hupp  Reservoir 41 

The  Berthoud  Town  Lake 41 

The  Jansen  Reservoir 41 

Hummel  Lake 41 

Beasley  Lake 41 

The  Welch  reservoirs 41 

The  Chapman  Reservoir 42 

Reservoirs  under  the  Home  Supply  Canal 42 

5 


Page. 

Duty  of  water 44 

Seepage 46 

Administration  and  distribution 49 

Titles  to  water 52 

I  aws 56 

Litigation 62 

First  scries  of  contests 65 

Scc.nd  scries  of  contests 67 

( Mher  litigation 69 

New  Loveland  and  Greeley  Land  and  Irrigation  C<».  v.  Home  Supply 

Co 68 

Lower  Latham  Ditch  Co.  v.  Loudon  Irrigating  Co.  et  al 70 

Comments 71 

Conclusion 75 


ILLUSTRATIONS. 


PLATES. 

Page. 

Dam  and  head  gate  of  Handy  Ditch,  Big  Thompson  River Frontispiece 

Plate      I.  Map  of  Big  Thompson  Valley 10 

II.  Dam  and  head  works,  Home  Supply  Ditch,  Big  Thompson  River. . .        28 

III.  Outlet  tower,  Lake  Loveland 34 

IV.  Fig.  1. — Outlet  of  Lone  Tree  Reservoir.     Fig.  2. — Weir  just  below 

outlet  of  Lone  Tree  Reservoir 44 

V.  Fig.  1. — Mariano  Reservoir.     Fig.  2. — Dam  of  Mariano  Reservoir. .        44 

TEXT    FIGURE. 

Fig.  1.  Diagram  showing  the  water  supply  from  Big  Thompson  Creek,  and  the 

manner  of  its  use .'!2 

7 


IRRIGATION  FROM  BIG  THOMPSON  RIVER. 


INTRODUCTION. 

The  examination  and  study  of  the  Big  Thompson  was  undertaken  in 
preference  to  that  of  other  streams  for  the  reason  that  it  presents 
many  features  not  found  in  other  districts  and  at  the  same  time  is 
free  from  modifying  influences  and  conditions  not  related  to  strictly 
agricultural  pursuits  or  their  attendant  industries. 

The  district  presents  a  well-developed  and  substantial  set  of  local 
customs  and  regulations,  which  appear,  moreover,  to  be  sensible  and 
well  calculated  to  produce  good  results,  as  evidenced  by  the  consider- 
able length  of  time  they  have  been  in  vogue  and  which  have  been 
found  to  meet  the  requirements  of  the  people. 

That  portion  of  the  river  on  which  the  head  gates  are  located  is  not 
very  extensive  (PL  I),  and  in  consequence  the  matter  of  regulation  of 
the  proper  amount  of  water  to  be  turned  into  each  is  much  simplified. 
No  great  sand  bars  exist  in  the  river,  and  its  channel  is  excellent, 
making  the  loss  of  water  by  evaporation  or  seepage  small. 

The  art  of  farming  is  as  well  advanced  as  in  any  section  of  the 
State,  and  over  the  entire  district  there  is  a  notable  absence  of  any- 
thing approaching  thriftlessness  in  the  methods  used.  The  spirit  of 
orderliness  is  very  apparent  in  the  arrangement  of  the  farm  surround- 
ings and  in  the  neatness  with  which  the  farms,  large  and  small,  are 
kept  up. 

There  is  a  great  diversity  of  crops;  nearly  everything  grown  in 
Colorado  can  be  found.  Near  and  just  inside  the  first  line  of  foothills 
are  found  thrifty  and  profitable  orchards,  and.  while  most  of  the  farms 
have  more  or  less  of  an  orchard,  those  at  the  base  of  the  mountains 
are  especially  noteworthy.  Small  fruit  and  garden  truck  are  raised  in 
quantities  for  the  markets.  It  is  the  center  of  the  lamb-feeding  dis- 
trict, probably  100,000  head  being  fed  on  alfalfa  each  winter,  and 
many  cattle  also  are  wintered  and  fattened  here.  Wheat,  oats.  rye. 
barley,  and  corn  for  grain;  alfalfa,  timothy,  clover,  and  the  native 
grasses  of  the  second  bottom  as  hay.  give  not  only  great  diversity  of 
farm  produce,  but  of  farm  labor  as  well.  By  intelligent  handling  the 
farms  are  made  to  produce  crops  above  the  general  average  of  the 
State,  and  an  air  of  prosperity  and  energy  pervades  the  community. 

There  has  been  a  marked  tendency  toward  more  intensive  farming 


10 

and  toward  the  cutting  up  of  the  old  and  larger  farm-  into  smaller 
tracts  of  80  acres  and  less.  This  tendency  lias  grown  in  the  last  two 
years,  and  the  land  has  become  more  valuable  with  the  prospect  for 
and  the  building  of  a  beet-sugar  factory  at  the  town  of  Loveland. 
The  year  L901,  the  first  in  which  beets  were  extensively  planted,  has 
proved  the  suitability  of  the  soil  and  climate  to  the  cultivation  of  this 
plant. 

In  the  future  probably  few  farms  here  will  exceed  4<»  acre-  in 
extent;  every  acre  will  be  under  cultivation  and  be  made  to  yield 
something  more  nearly  approaching  the  capacity  of  the  land.  Indeed, 
it  appears  that  the  district  is  incapable  of  increasing  its  acreage  very 
much,  as  practically  all  the  land  between  the  ridge  on  the  north,  sep- 
arating the  Cache  la  Poudre  and  the  Big  Thompson  rivers,  and  that 
on  the  south,  separating  the  Big  Thompson  and  the  Little  Thompson. 
is  now  under  ditch  and  under  cultivation.  More  than  this,  tin1  water 
discharged  from  the  canyon  is  barely  equal  to  the  demand.  In  dry 
years  there  is  grave  apprehension  of  a  shortage  of  irrigating  water, 
and  the  utmost  economy  has  to  be  practiced.  Indeed,  the  very  effi- 
cient reservoir  systems,  which  will  be  spoken  of  later,  are  the  results 
of  the  necessity  for  more  and  later  water. 

The  storage  capacity  is  almost  equal  to  the  excess  run-off  over  and 
above  that  needed  for  direct  irrigation.  Very  little  water  escapes 
from  the  district  except  in  seasons  of  unusual  flow  and  during  short  and 
very  heavy  storms.  In  the  year  1900  every  reservoir  in  the  district 
was  full  early  in  the  storing  season,  which  is  generally  in  June,  and 
some  water  passed  into  other  districts:  this,  however,  was  exceptional. 
During  the  spring  of  1901  many  of  the  reservoirs  were  practically 
empty  until  late  in  the  season;  copious  rains,  however,  came,  and  a 
good  run  of  water  was  had.  tilling  the  reservoirs  to  nearly  their  full 
capacity,  and  to  the  end  of  the  season  there  was  no  complaint  of  the 
water  supply. 

Another  consideration  in  selecting  the  Big  Thompson  was  that  its 
waters  are  used  almost  exclusively  for  agricultural  purposes:  there  is 
no  mining  in  the  district,  with  its  attendant  waste  and  contamination 
and  with  its  conflicting  interests.  In  some  districts  of  the  State  the 
slimes"  from  the  stamp  mills  above,  together  with  the  sand  and  gravel 
of  the  placers,  cause  trouble  in  keeping  the  ditches  in  good  condition. 
The  slimes  in  particular  are  annoying,  as  they  do  not  settle  readily, 
and  so  find  their  way  onto  the  fields  and  gardens,  where  they  leave  an 
almost  impervious  sticky  coating  of  scarcely  any  fertilizing  value,  but 
very  deleterious  to  such  fruits  and  vegetables  as  come  in  contact  with 
it.  There  is  likewise  no  use  of  water  for  manufacturing  purposes,  so 
that  in  distribution  only  agricultural  uses  are  considered. 

"T\w  technical  term  applied  t<«  the  fine  powdered  rock,  mostly  in  suspension, 
coming  from  the  Btamp  mills  and  closely  resembling  that  carried  by  glacial  streams. 


scale;  or  miles 


[HJLANDS  UNDER  RIST  a  GOSS  DITCH 

:-:-;]lanos  under  big  Thompson  a  meg  co  ditch 

gj^j LANDS  UNDER  BIG  THOMPSON  IRRIG  a  MrG.OlTCH 
==J  LANDS  UNOER  EARMERS  IRRIGATING  CANAL 
| LANDS  UNDER  HOME  SUPPLY  CANAL 

|laNDSUNDER  HILLSBOROUGH  CANAL 

~|lANOSUNDERBIG  THOMPSON  NO.I  DITCH 
LANDS  UNDER  HILLa  BRUSH  ( 
LANOS UNDER  BIG  THOMPSON  5 PLATTE  RIVDITW 


Map  of  Big  Thompson  Valley. 


11 

The  district  is,  moreover,  practically  independent  of  others  in  its 
claims  to  water.  There  is  no  district  above,  but  below  the  Big 
Thompson  empties  into  the  Platte  River  and  is  subject  to  the  priorities 
on  that  stream.  However,  it  is  found  in  practice  that  tin1  priorities 
on  the  Bio-  Thompson  arc,  generally  speaking, older  than  those  on  the 
Platte  At  such  times  as  there  might  be  a  conflict  there  is  an  abun- 
dance of  water.  Above  the  Big  Thompson  the  St.  Vrain  discharges 
into  the  Platte  River  a  reliable  How  late  in  the  season,  and  this, 
together  with  a  considerable  inflow  of  seepage  water,  supplies  :ill  the 
old  priorities  on  the  Platte  below  Platteville.  The  return  seepage 
water  in  the  Big  Thompson  furnishes  all  the  very  old  priorities  on 
that  stream  at  its  lower  end  and  sends  some  water  into  the  Platte. 

The  last,  but  one  of  the  most  important,  of  the  reasons  for  selecting 
this  stream  is  that  it  presents  clearly  the  extreme  to  which  litigation 
over  rights  to  water  may  be  carried. 

PHYSICAL  CHARACTERISTICS. 

Water  district  No.  4,  or  the  Thompson  district,  lies  in  the  South 
Platte  division,  or  division  No.  1,  and  wholly  within  the  State  of  Col- 
orado. It  embraces  portions  of  Boulder,  Larimer,  and  Weld  counties, 
extending  from  the  continental  divide,  on  the  west,  eastward  to  the 
South  Platte  River,  with  elevations  varying  from  5,000  to  1-1,000  feet, 
the  entire  western  boundary  being  above  timber  line,  which  in  this 
latitude  is  about  11,000  feet.  The  mountains,  especially  the  northern 
slopes,  are  a  region'blessed  with  perpetual  snow,  from  which  the  late 
water  is  almost  entirely  derived.  Below  timber  line  the  slopes  of  the 
mountains  are  fairly  well  covered  with  timber.  Fire  has  not  yet 
caused  its  entire  destruction,  and  over  the  burned  areas  a  new  growth 
is  spreading  rapidly,  aiding  in  the  conservation  of  the  water  supply  by 
retarding  the  melting  of  the  snow. 

The  district  may  properly  be  divided  into  three  divisions.  The  first 
of  these  is  the  mountain  region,  where  both  the  Little  and  Big 
Thompson  rivers  flow  in  places  through  deep  ravines  and  in  others 
traverse  open  parks  of  greater  or  less  area.  In  these  parks  a  few 
ditches  have  been  taken  out  for  the  purpose  of  irrigating  hay  meadows. 
Never  far  away  from  the  streams,  flowing  over  porous,  shallow  soil 
underlaid  by  solid  rock,  most  of  the  water  soon  finds  its  way  back  to 
the  river.  As  these  ditches  are  small  and  are  not  included  in  the 
adjudication  of  rights  by  the  court,  they  are  not  considered  in  the  dis- 
tribution of  the  water  of  the  district,  nor  will  they  be  considered  in  this 
discussion. 

The  second  division  includes  the  lands  irrigated  by  the  waters  of  the 
Little  Thompson.  The  Little  and  Big  Thompson  rivers  unite  at  a 
point  so  near  the  entrance  of  the  Big  Thompson  to  the  Platte  that  the 
distribution  of  the  water  of  each  is  practically  independent  of  the  other. 


12 

The  third  division  comprises  all  the  land  watered  by  the  Bio- Thomp- 
son between  the  point  where  it  Issues  from  the  mountains  and  its  junc- 
tion with  the  South  Platte  River. 

In  order  to  confine  this  discussion  within  the  narrowest  possible 
limits,  except  in  so  far  as  the  other  divisions  may  affect  the  third,  that 
division,  by  far  the  most  important  and  the  most  interesting,  alone 
will  he  considered. 

To  one  standing  on  the  outer  range  of  foothills  near  the  mouth  of 
the  canyon  and  looking  east,  the  entire  valley  of  the  Big  Thompson  is 
visible.  To  the  north,  extending  eastward,  is  the  ridge  between  the 
(ache  la  Poudrc  and  Big  Thompson  rivers,  some  10  miles  away  at  the 
westerly  end.  and  gradually  approaching  the  river  on  its  eastern  trend. 
The  ground  sloping  gently  to  the  river  appears  somewhat  rolling. 
To  the  south  a  similar  ridge  marks  the  boundary  between  the  Little 
and  Big  Thompson  rivers.  Less  rolling,  the  country  here  presents  a 
smooth,  even  slope  to  the  river. 

The  elevation  and  the  fall  of  the  river  are  such  that  the  higher 
ditches  skirting  the  foothills  soon  reach  the  crests  of  those  ridges  and 
extend  down  them  to  the  limit  of  their  supply  of  water  for  the  lower- 
lying  land,  but  supplying  water  to  lands  on  both  the  Cache  la  Poudre 
and  Little  Thompson  slopes. 

WATEE  SUPPLY. 

Under  this  head  will  be  found  the  data  collected  for  a  number  of 
years  on  the  subject  of  precipitation  and  run-off.   - 

The  gauging  station  on  the  Big  Thompson  River  was  established  in 
1883  by  the  late  E.  S.  Nettleton.  then  State  engineer  of  Colorado,  and 
was  located  "about  200  yards  above  the  head  of  the  upper  ditch.  12 
miles  from  Loveland."  This  station  being  found  unsatisfactory,  was 
abandoned,  and  in  1887  another  was  established  about  10  miles  west  of 
Loveland  and  was  maintained  until  1892.  In  1893  and  1891  no  read- 
ings were  taken  on  the  river.  On  May  9.  1895,  a  third  station  was 
established  some  9  miles  west  of  Loveland.  Being  below  both  the 
Handy  and  Home  Supply  ditches,  a  record  of  both  of  these,  entailing 
considerable  extra  labor,  was  necessary.  On  this  account  the  station 
was  moved  to  a  point  above  the  head  of  the  Home  Supply  Ditch  April 
1,  1899.  This  station,  located  about  3  miles  south  of  the  post-office  at 
Arkins,  at  a  point  where  the  wagon  bridge  crosses  the  stream,  though 
below  the  Handy  Ditch,  is  quite  satisfactory.  The  gauge  rod  is  a  verti- 
cal 2-by-4  fastened  on  the  downstream  side  of  the  south  abutment  of 
the  bridge. 

The  channel,  though  quite  rough  and  full  of  bowlders,  is  permanent, 
and  the  results  obtained  are  reliable.  The  entire  record  for  the  river 
at  the  several  stations  is  given  in  the  accompanying  table: 


13 


ComparaHiM  t<ti>/,  of  discharge  oj  Big  Thompson  River  at  Arkin     I 


Month. 

1888. 

1888. 

L890. 

1891. 

1892. 

L896. 
Cu.fi 

1898. 

1897. 
Ou.fi 

L89G 

1899. 

Cu.fi 

381 
140 

l 

on 
808 
L46 

1 .  686 
917 
151 

1,189 
653 

416 

589 
283 

lie 

146 
92 
35 

a  116 

64 

L900. 

April: 

Cu.fi. 

in  >.«<■. 
in> 
62 

10 

260 

132 
50 

760 
158 
200 

no 

275 

160 

580 
190 
100 

180 
75 
60 

100 
46 
40 

Cu.fi. 
t»  raec. 

Cu.fi. 
i><  raec 

Cu.fi 

Cu.fi. 

\,i  r  ■-'  <■■ 

Cu.fi. 

i»  rsec 
74 
87 

.". 

911 
218 

5 

183 
285 
180 

403 
225 
152 

143 

111 
38 

195 
119 
74 

138 
66 
20 

Cu.fi 

Cu.fi 

I"  t 

M  C. 
1,990 

112 

1 

May: 

546        707 
359         136 
ISO 

L,  182 
817 
523 

63d 
883 
219 

235 
159 

105 

137 

95 

69 

182 
312 
195 

L,195 

Till 
329 

864 
198 

259 

247 
150 
81 

90 
49 
39 

120 
318 

217 

323 
570 
344 

77s 
165 
293 

6% 
319 
174 

217 
146 
32 

132 
79 
20 

120 
64 

165 

36 

[59 
267 

iif, 

390 
133 
36 

85 
37 
15 

is 

8 

5 

841 

164 

L3 

606 

:;77 

517 

288 

36 

177 
79 
45 

98 

36 

8 

■Jl 
13 

4 

24 
8 
4 

2,090 

l  382 

896 

June: 

527 
382 
208 

370 
200 
10* 

137 

89 
53 

59 

49 
40 

50 

712 
530 
365 

1,603 
l.M 
255 

643 

393 
185 

235 
151 

65 

97 

l.'.P.NI 

Mean 

1,362 

7:;7 

July: 

566 

349 

208 

August: 

208 

137 

88 

September: 

38 

77 

60 

October: 

(6          67 
28          51 

38    

November: 

100 

S3 
60 

a  No  record  October  1  to  7. 

On  account  of  the  uncertainty  of  the  location  of  the  earlier  stations 
and  because  it  is  not  known  whether  the  waters  diverted  by  the  ditches 
above  the  stations  were  included  in  the  discharges  as  given,  the  records 
for  the  years  1888  to  1892,  inclusive,  have  been  excluded  in  making 
estimates  of  the  discharge  and  run -off.  In  the  table  which  follows  the 
volume  diverted  by  the  ditches  is  added  to  the  discharge  as  given  in 
the  preceding  table,  and  the  average  computed  for  the  six  years  1895 
to  1900,  inclusive. 

Run-off  df  Big  Thompson  drainogi  area. 


Monti). 

1895. 

1896.      !      1897.            1898. 

1899.          1900.      Average. 

Average 
monthly 
precipita- 
tion.fi 

.lamia  rv 

Cubic  feet 
pt  r  st  c. 

ft  60 

Cubic  feet  Cubic  feel  Cubic  feet 
i»  r  sec.      i"  r  sec.      ji>  r  sec 

'Mill                 /Mil)                 ft  CO 

Cubic  feet  Cubic  feet  Cubic  feet 
per  sec      per  sec      per  sec 

ft  60            ft  60              60 
ft  60              '' Ci)                60 
blOO            ft  100               100 

Inches. 

0.71 

February  . . 

6  60 

'Mill                   ftfiO                   ft  CI) 

l  r.) 

March  

ft  100            ft  100            '>  100            ft  100 

ft  250                37           &250           &25Q 

440              269              590  I            231 

931              363              679               198 

687             2fil              379             317 

1   75 

April 

302              41"              250              2.19 

May 

353           1.382              544              2.60 

Julie 

1,037          1,497             834              1.18 

770               379               4C"»              2.27 

July 

August 

re 

173                196 

112 
57 

28 
17 

ft60 

316              159              230              1.74 

September 

185 
116 

ft  70 
ft  60 

161 

71 

103  '             ^7              111              i  or 

October 

97 

ft  70 
ft60 

54 

27 
*>60 

64             ''71                71 

1.11 

November 

ft  70              ft  70                .54 
ft  60              ft  60                60 

69 

December 

68 

Average 

282 

143 

211 

149 

275               361               237             17.48 

"Melted  snow  and  rain. 


''Estimated. 


14 


( bniparatuh  BtaU  rm  ni  of  run-off  and  /</•-  ajntatfan. 


year. 

Precipi- 
tation. 

Precipi- 
tation.-i 

Run-off. 

Runoff. 

Inches. 
22. 87 
L7.28 

lv-7 
16.86 
16.58 
16.72 

Inches. 
24.10 

17.07 
17.02 
16.99 
18.25 
16.42 

Inches. 
12.6 

6.3 
9.3 
6.6 
12.1 
16.0 

Per  cent. 
52 



1 896                          

37 

1897                                 

55 

1  S'lx                                                                      

39 



66 

L900      

97 

a  Year  ending  October  31. 

It  was  found  necessary  to  estimate  the  discharges  for  the  months 
when  no  record  was  kept.  These,  being  the  months  of  least  How.  were 
easily  determined.  At  the  same  time  any  error  in  the  estimate  affects 
the  general  result  but  little.  In  arriving  at  the  conclusions  given  the 
discharges  of  other  rivers  in  the  State  which  had  records  covering  the 
entire  year  were  examined.  As  a  result  of  such  examination  the  gen- 
eral proposition  may  be  stated  that  streams  reach  their  minimum 
before  the  1st  of  November,  increasing  thereafter  slightly  to  Decem- 
ber, and  thereafter  the  discharge  is  quite  constant  until  the  warm 
days  in  spring  increase  the  now. 

The  following  tables  of  precipitation  are  furnished  by  the  United 
State-  Weather  Bureau  and  are  for  the  three  stations  of  the  district. 
The  Longs  Peak  and  Moraine  stations  are  located  well  back  in  the 
mountains,  the  Moraine  station  having  an  elevation  of  7.000  feet  above 
sea  level.  This  station,  located  on  one  of  the  branches  which  consti- 
tute the  headwaters  of  the  Big  Thompson,  is  about  6  miles  from  the 
summit  of  the  range,  and,  being  so  situated,  gives  a  much  better  general 
average  of  rainfall  on  the  watershed  of  the  Big  Thompson  than  either 
the  Longs  Peak  station  or  the  Waterdale  station.  Besides  this,  the 
observations  cover  nearly  twice  as  many  years.  For  these  reasons,  in 
estimating  the  run-off  relative  to  the  precipitation,  the  averages  in  this 
table  have  been  used.  The  Waterdale  station  is  located  near  Arkins, 
just  inside  the  first  range  of  low  foothills,  and  these  records  are  of 
most  use  in  cases  where  the  precipitation  on  the  cultivated  land  is 
wanted. 

Precipitation  for  L<>n<js  Peak  station,  Larimer  County,  Colo. 


Year. 

Jan.       Feb. 

Mar. 

Apr.      May. 

June. 

July. 

Aug. 

Sept. 

Oct. 

Nov.  j  Dec. 

Total. 

1 B96.... 

Inches.  Inches. 

Inches. 

Inches. 

Inches. 

Inches. 

2.70 
.65 
1.50 
2.06 
1.09 
.80 

4.61 
3.60 
1.86 

2.94 

4.  32 

.51 

Inches. 
1.52 
2.95 
1.29 
1.53 
1.73 
.17 

Inches. 

1.10 

1.95 

.95 

.81 

.11 

1.93 

In  <  ■!,>.<. 
2.60 
1.05 
1.41 
.60 
2.50 
1.14 

Inches. 

0.50 

.37 

1.07 

1.60 

.02 

.44 

Inches. 

0.17 
.15 
.55 
.60 
.64 
.64 

Inches. 

1897.... 

1899.... 
1900.... 

6.65 
.78       1.25 
.24 
.54       1.16 

. 16         .  B6 

3.17 
1.96 

3.01 
.35 

1.00 
1.45 

1.73 
1.18 
6.34 

1.21 

1.60 

■2.07 

.38 

.60 

16.91 
15.66 
15.76 
16.67 
13.93 

Mean 

.40         .  <»3       L85       2.54       1.17 

1.47       2.97  i     1.53 

1.14       1.55 

.67 

.46       16.48 

15 


PrecipUatitm  ai  dfora&ne  station,  Larimer  County,  Colo. 


Year. 

Jan. 

Feb. 

Mar. 

Apr. 

Ma\  . 

June. 

July. 

Mil-. 

Sept. 

on. 

N<-v. 

Dec. 

Total. 

Inches. 

Tnchea, 

I  mius. 

Indus. 

Inches. 

Inches. 

1  nrhis. 

I  miiis. 

I  mins. 

Inches. 

I  mius. 

I miu  s. 

Inches. 

1889... 

1 .  :,7 

1.84 

ii.  Hi 

.65 

.  Mil 
.:;:. 

1890.... 

0. 81 

0. 76 

0.71 

•2.77 

1.30 

l.o:, 

2.  I-' 

:;.  lo 

0.82 

L891.... 

2.  88 

8.00 

:;.  52 

L.80 

:;.  26 

1.10 

1.12 

.  '.to 

l.  16 

.81 

.01 

.  02 

20.70 

1892.... 

.50 

1.80 

1.84 

1 .  69 

8.23 

.si 

2.17 

.(12 

.0(1 

.110 

.60 

18.  I- 

1898-... 

.69 

2.  32 

1.88 

l.:;i 

L.76 

.:?7 

1.  i:; 

1.88 

.21 

.  i:; 

l.o:; 

.00 

1  1.  10 

L894.... 

.40 

.  99 

L.08 

1  .  Mi 

.">.  72 

.88 

2.2^ 

1.26 

2.1:; 

.  66 

.:.( 

l .  58 

L8.75 

L896.... 

.  12 

L.60 

l.  in 

1.71 

1.63 

2.53 

:}. 66 

2. 86 

.84 

2.80 

.86 

.in 

22.  :;7 

L896.... 

.68 

•  >•) 

•_'.  87 

L.08 

1.(12 

.  10 

3.88 

2.50 

•2.71 

.7.', 

.80 

.:*o 

17. 28 

1897.... 

.61 

1 .  68 

L.86 

1.29 

2.30 

1.79 

2.52 

2.  48 

.78 

1.1.1 

1 . 2:. 

1.20 

18.87 

1898 

.50 

l.o:. 

1 .  32 

1.  11 

3.05 

1.98 

2.19 

1 .  (17 

.40 

.  00 

1.77 

.  55 

L6.86 

L899.... 

.77 

2.  82 

2.  98 

1 .  89 

.45 

1.57 

3.02 

1 .  82 

.15 

1.00 

.00 

.  65 

L6.68 

1900.... 

.'21 

1.11 

.30 

7.71 

1.30 

.91 

.  86 

.  28 

2.  19 

1 .  12 

.  17 

.  Is 

K1.72 

Mean 

.71 

1.67 

1.75 

2. 19 

2.  GO 

1.18 

2. 27 

1.74 

1.07 

1.11 

.69 

.08 

17.48 

Precipitation  at  Waterdale  station,  near  Arkins,  Colo. 


Year. 


Jan. 


Feb. 


Mar. 


Apr. 


May. 


Juno. 


July 


Aug. 


Sept. 


Oct. 


Nov. 


Dee. 


Total. 


1900.... 
Mean 


[mius. 
0.21 
.  (12 
.18 
.21 
.63 
.19 


Inches. 

1.33 
.28 
.50 
.25 

1.10 


Inches. 

o.  o,s 
1.50 
2.32 

.87 
1.25 

.97 


I  mius, 
1.89 
1.22 
1.82 

1.  12 

.SI 

9.21 


Inches, 

4.95 
1.66 
3.61 
3.43 
.67 
1.76 


Indus. 
4.60 
1.83 
2.30 
1.86 
.92 
.45 


Inches. 
5.84 
2.58 
2.42 
1.20 
2.12 
1.05 


Indies. 
0. 57 
1.44 
1.09 
1.61 
.94 
.57 


Inches. 

0.51 

2.60 

.84 

.51 

.19 

1.72 


Indus. 
1. 15 


Inches. 


Indus, 


Inches. 


1.07 
.75 

3.30 
.18 


0.08 
.82 

1.62 
.00 
.12 


0.43 
.64 

.:.o 
.49 
.22 


,84 


72 


1.32 


2.73 


2.54 


1.04 


1.06 


1.19 


,53 


14. 92 
17.61 
11.2(1 
12. 45 
17.30 

16.60 


A  comparison  of  the  averages  of  the  three  tables  shows  that  the 
rainfall  is  very  evenly  distributed,  there  being  little  difference  between 
that  of  places  at  an  elevation  of  6,000  feet  and  of  those  at  9,000  feet. 
Nor  does  there  appear  in  the  tables  anything  to  indicate  that  the  pre- 
cipitation is  differently  distributed  over  the  year,  all  three  showing 
the  least  precipitation  in  winter  and  the  most  in  the  spring  and  sum- 
mer. The  records  cover  a  period  scarcely  long  enough  to  make  com- 
parisons or  to  reach  conclusions.  An  attempt  was  made  to  ascertain 
what  relation  the  precipitation  during  the  winter  had  to  the  late  flow  of 
the  river,  but  no  conclusion  was  reached  while  considering  chiefly  the 
snowfall  at  the  high  altitudes.  In  this  study  the  year  was  divided  not 
at  January  1,  but  at  November  1,  assuming  that  the  snow  falling  after 
November  1  would  remain  until  spring  at  least.  This  failure  to  reach 
a  conclusion  is  not  surprising,  for  the  late  flow  is  dependent  as  much 
upon  the  amount  of  drifting  as  upon  the  quantity  of  snowfall,  it  being 
only  deep  drifts  that  remain  late.  The  temperature  in  spring  is  a 
factor,  as  is  also  the  rainfall  at  that  time.  Warm  spring  rains  melt 
the  great  drifts  on  the  northern  slopes  and  in  the  sheltered  places 
rapidly.  The  rain,  augmented  by  the  melted  snow,  flows  away  almost 
immediately,  while  snow  melted  b}^  the  sun  late  in  the  day  refreezes 
to  a  considerable  extent  the  succeeding  night.  The  slower  melting  of 
the  snow  also  allows  the  water  to  enter  the  soil  and  the  cracks  and 
crevices  of  the  rocks,  to  reappear  later  in  the  season  in  springs  which 


16 


feed  the  river.  This  applies  t<>  the  untimbered  portions  and  those 
above  timber  line  where  the  winds  and  rains  have  free  access  to  the 

snow,  and  has  especial  reference  to  Longs  Peak  station.  Under  these 
modifying  conditions,  of  which  there  are  no  records  and  which  inject 
so  many  variables  into  the  calculation,  and  with  so  few  years  of  com- 
plete records  to  consider,  even  though  conclusions  were  reached,  they 
would  not  he  positive  in  their  character.  Necessarily  a  good  snowfall 
during  the  early  winter  on  the  higher  elevations  melts  later  than  that 
lower  down  when  unprotected  under  similar  conditions  of  rain  and 
sun  during  the  melting  period.  If  the  winds  aid  in  building  deep 
drifts  in  the  ravines,  or  if  there  are  no  warm  rains,  the  beneficial 
result  of  an  early  snow  is  quite  marked.  The  records  given  here, 
however,  seem  to  indicate  that  the  run-off  from  protected  snows  can 
be  more  easily  predicted  in  advance  and  are  less  affected  by  the  con- 
ditions of  rain.  sun.  and  wind  during  the  melting  period. 

The  run-off  and  average  rainfall,  as  given  above,  seem  to  hear  a 
relation  to  each  other.  Both  being-  considered  for  the  year,  one  would 
expect  little  difference  in  their  relative  proportions.  By  the  table, 
the  year  L895  had  22.37  inches  precipitation  and  an  average  run-off  of 
282  cubic  feet  per  second.  The  following  year  a  decrease  in  rainfall 
brought  a  decrease  in  the  run-off  of  139  cubic  feet  per  second,  nearly 
50  per  cent.  In  1897  there  was  an  increase  in  both  items,  in  1898  a 
decrease  in  both,  while  for  1899  the  run-off  was  nearly  twice  as  much 
as  in  1898,  and  in  1900  nearly  three  times  as  much  as  in  1898,  with 
scarcely  any  difference  in  precipitation  for  the  three  years.  The  run- 
off for  the  year  1900  exceeded,  indeed,  that  for  1895,  with  its  record- 
breaking  rainfall  of  2^.87  inches.  The  difference  of  time  of  year  of 
the  rainfall  and  the  run-off  for  these  years  of  extremes  will  now 
be  examined.  In  1895  it  is  seen  that  the  run-off  had  a  maximum 
recorded  discharge  of  931  cubic  feet  per  second  and  a  minimum  of 
116  cubic  feet  per  second;  that  for  August,  September,  and  October, 
months  of  small  discharge,  the  flow  exceeded  that  of  any  other  year 
for  the  corresponding  months.  For  May.  June,  and  July,  however, 
the  average  run-off  for  1895  is  exceeded  a  number  of  times  in  years 
greatly  less  in  total  precipitation,  as,  for  example,  May.  1897,  June 
and  July.  1899,  and  May  and  June.  1900.  The  year  1900  is  especially 
remarkable,  May  and  June  Bhowing  the  highest  run-off  for  any  months 
of  which  there  is  record,  while  for  the  months  of  small  now  the  dis- 
charge is  considerably  below  the  normal.  Turning  now  to  the  record 
of  precipitation,  it  will  be  seen  that  at  the  Moraine  station  it  was 
remarkably  well  distributed  throughout  the  different  months  of  L895, 
with  a  maximum  for  May  of  4.t>3  inches,  about  one-fifth  of  the  total. 
In  1900,  however,  the  distribution  was  very  poor.  7.74  inches  falling 
in  the  month  of  April  alone,  almost  one-half  of  the  rainfall  for  the 
entire  year.     Although  the  total  run-off  for  1900  was  far  in  excess  of 


17 

that  for  L895,  much  of  the  water  escaped  and  was  not  available  for  irri- 
gation. Neither  the  reservoir  nor  the  feeder-ditch  capacity  was  suffi- 
cient to  store  more  than  a  fraction  of  the  Mow  for  May  and  June,  nor 
would  it  he  economy  to  increase  them  to  an  extent  sufficient  to  store 
such  floods,  occurring  as  they  do  at  rare  intervals;  in  fact,  only  once 
in  twelve  years  is  such  a  Hood  recorded.  Therefore  a  uniformly  dis- 
tributed  rainfall,  as  in  L895,  even  though  it  give  a  much  smaller 
percentage  of  run-off  as  compared  with  precipitation,  is  better  than 
that  of  a  year  like  L900,  when  most  of  it  occurs  in  a  short  period. 

The  variations  in  the  percentages  of  run-off  and  its  causes  will  now 
be  considered.  The  run-off  for  L895  was  52  per  cent,  while  that  of 
L900  was  !>7  per  cent  of  the  precipitation.  The  great  loss  of  1895  was 
caused  by  the  long  exposure  to  the  dry  winds,  a  large  amount  of  even 
the  early  winter  snows  passing  directly  from  the  solid  to  the  vaporous 
state.  The  remarkable  run-oil'  of  L900  is  due  principally  to  the  rapidity 
with  which  the  water  reached  the  stream  and  to  the  short  exposure. 
Two  other  causes,  which  might  be  classed  as  errors  in  the  data  used, 
contributed  to  swell  the  percentage  of  run-off:  First,  the  precipitation 
on  the  lower  reaches  of  the  river,  as  shown  by  the  Arkins  station  rec- 
ords, was  greater  than  that  shown  by  Moraine  station  records;  second, 
almost  no  old  snow  remained  after  the  summer  of  1900.  Snow  banks 
which  had  been  considered  wi  perpetual"  had  by  the  action  of  the  rains 
been  almost  entirely  melted.  This  snow,  deposited  in  previous  years, 
of  course  does  not  appear  in  the  records  of  precipitation  for  the  year 
1900.  Considering  the  long  exposure  of  1895,  the  percentage  of  loss 
by  evaporation  is  not  remarkable.  In  the  year  1899  there  was  a  large 
precipitation  in  the  early  spring,  probably  in  the  form  of  light  snow, 
which,  melting  rapidly  as  the  weather  warmed,  caused  high  water  in 
the  early  summer.  The  bountiful  snowfall  of  the  preceding  Novem- 
ber and  December  furnished  a  good  late  flow. 

The  record  of  Longs  Peak  station  failed  to  establish  a  relation 
between  a  late  flow  and  the  snowfall  in  the  early  winter;  but  here  we 
have,  when  considering  the  precipitation  for  lower  altitudes,  appar- 
ently positive  proof  that  early  winter  snows  do  augment  the  flow. 
What,  then,  is  the  reason  for  the  apparent  slower  run-off  at  the  lower 
altitudes \  As  already  mentioned,  the  timber  near  the  headwaters  is 
still  well  preserved  and  new  timber  is  coming  up  where  fire  passed 
some  years  ago.  In  these  lowrer  altitudes  the  soil  is  deeper,  the  many 
small  depressions  form  lakes  and  marshes,  and  numerous  small  grassy 
parks  are  found;  all  these  aid  in  retarding  the  escape  of  the  water.  A 
good  fall  of  snow  in  the  spring  will  lie  in  the  timber  for  a  long  time; 
such  as  falls  on  the  little  open  parks  is  absorbed  by  the  ground  as  it 
melts;  the  melting  in  the  timber  is  slow"  and  almost  all  the  water  sinks 
into  the  ground,  and,  while  the  snow  itself  may  disappear  early,  con- 
2817— No.  118—02 2 


18 

siderable  time  is  consumed  by  the  water  in  percolating  through  the 
soil  before  it  appears  again  in  the  springs  and  water  courses  lower 
down. 

The  forests,  especially,  aid  in  holding  back  the  water,  for  they  pro- 
tect both  the  unmeited  snow  and  the  wet  ground  or  surface  water  from 
the  dry  winds  and  sun,  and  the  loose,  porous  soil  of  the  forests  will 
absorb  water  almost  as  fast  as  the  snow  is  melted.  In  the  higher 
un forested  areas,  the  ground  being  much  steeper  and  with  less  cover- 
ing to  absorb  the  melted  snow,  the  run-off  is  much  more  rapid. 

From  the  above  the  following  statements  are  formulated: 

(1)  Snows  in  the  early  winter  in  high  altitude  will  furnish  a  late 
flow,  but  the  amount  of  late  flow  therefrom  is  modified  at  first  by 
the  drifting  and  then  by  weather  conditions  as  regards  rains  and 
cloudiness. 

(2)  Snows  in  the  forested  areas  give  a  better  distribution  of  run-off 
than  in  unforested  areas. 

(3)  Years  of  well-distributed  precipitation  give  a  more  even  and 
later  flow  in  the  rivers  than  years  of  excessive  periodical  rains;  but 
years  of  evenly  distributed  rainfall  give  a  less  total  of  run-off. 

The  average  run-off  for  six  years  was  237  cubic  feet  per  second  for 
the  entire  year.  This  means  a  total  of  470  acre-feet  per  da}',  or  171,550 
acre-feet  per  year. 

The  drainage  area  of  the  Big  Thompson  above  the  gauging  station  is 
given  as  305  square  miles,  or  195.200  acres.  The  run-off  in  depth  over 
the  entire  surface  is  therefore  0.88  foot,  or  10.56  inches,  as  compared 
with  17.18  inches  precipitation.  This  indicates  that  about  57  per  cent 
of  the  total  precipitation  would  be  available  for  irrigation  if  it  could 
all  be  stored  or  should  come  at  such  time  and  in  such  volume  as  could 
be  used  for  direct  irrigation.  This  subject  will  be  treated  in  the  dis- 
cussion of  duty  of  water  and  reservoirs. 

DITCHES. 

In  the  valley  of  the  Big  Thompson  prior  to  1861  there  was  very 
little  settlement,  the  gold  excitement  being  much  farther  south,  the 
point  farthest  north  where  any  mining  was  done  being  on  Boulder 
Creek. 

It  wTas  the  mines  that  furnished,  in  the  earliest  days  as  they  do  now, 
the  best  and  most  profitable  market;  and  then,  as  now,  the  farms  made 
possible  the  development  of  most  of  the  mining  resources. 

The  irrigation  of  the  meadow  lands  required  a  great  deal  of  water, 
or.  if  they  did  not  really  require  it.  it  took  a  great  deal  to  injure  them. 
Underlaid,  as  they  usually  were,  with  a  bed  of  coarse  gravel,  bowlders, 
and  wash,  they  drained  quickly,  and  little  alkali  was  brought  to  the 
surface,  that  undesirable  substance  coming  later  from  the  upper  lands. 
The  higher  grounds  were  leached  by  the  excessive  application  of  water; 


19 

the  resultant  seepage,  strongly   impregnated,  appeared  later  in  the 
lower  lands,  and,  evaporating,  left  on  the  surface  a  coating  of  white 

alkali. 

In  the  construction  of  the  earlier  ditches  n<>  attempt  was  made  to 
reach  a  level  higher  than  the  bottom  lands.  'The  early  settler  was 
skeptical  as  to  the  ability  of  the  upper  lands  to  produce  anything  other 
than  short  grass  and  cactus,  and  the  running  of  ditches  out  onto  the 
mesas  was  too  great  an  undertaking.  The  ditches  began  only  high 
enough  up  on  the  stream  to  cover  the  land  of  the  builders,  and  were 
given  a  grade  more  with  reference  to  making  the  water  run  than  to 
maintaining  a  maximum  elevation.  The  matter  of  erosion  of  the  ditch 
was  never  considered.  The  ditch  was  carried  over  the  edge  of  the  first 
mesa  and  thence  along  its  foot  on  no  uniform  or  fixed  grade.  Often 
the  rate  of  fall  was  greater  than  that  of  the  river  itself,  which  in 
its meanderings  back  and  forth  traversed  much  Longer  distances  than 
the  ditch  between  the  same  points.  The  consequence  was  that  the 
ditches  washed  and  grew  larger  and  larger.  An  extension  required  no 
enlargement  of  the  old  portion,  and  the  abundance  of  water  and  the 
ease  with  which  a  large  amount  was  obtained  led  to  excessive  use.  If 
the  decrees  were  based  on  the  sizes  of  the  ditches  it  is  not  surprising 
that  they  were  excessive. 

There  were  probably  earlier,  small,  unimportant,  and  now  forgot- 
ten ditches,  but  at  present  there  are  only  15  in  all.  Of  these,  2 
are  practically  abandoned  and  2  are  small  and  supplied  by  seepage, 
while  1  other  has  no  decree  and  is  likewise  supplied  by  seepage. 
Those  ditches  which  survived  up  to  the  granting  of  decrees  in  1881 
are  described  below,  and,  as  far  as  possible,  their  original  names,  loca- 
tions, sizes,  and  the  land  covered  at  the  various  periods  are  given. 
It  is  a  delicate  matter  to  make  statements  concerning  these  ditches,  in 
view  of  the  lawsuits  past  and  anticipated.  When  voluminous  court 
records  give  directly  conflicting  evidence  by  the  "oldest  inhabitants," 
one  will  surely  be  excused  for  so  often  using  the  words  "possible," 
"probable,"  "perhaps,"  and  "about." 

The  statement  of  the  former  and  present  value  of  lands  under  sev- 
eral ditches  is  given  for  three  reasons: 

(1)  To  compare  them  with  unirrigated  Government  and  railroad 
lands. 

(2)  To  show  the  change  of  sentiment  toward  bottom  lands  and  those 
on  tin1  mesa.  In  the  early  days  bottom  lands  only  were  of  much  value. 
yet  a  few  years  ago  they  were  the  lowest  priced  of  any  in  the  district. 
The  reclamation  of  this  land  by  drainage  will  make  it  very  valuable 
for  the  planting  of  onions  in  particular  and  of  sugar  beets,  as  it  is 
very  rich  though  hard  to  thoroughly  subdue.  It  is  quite  rough  and 
requires  leveling  to  make  it  available  for  these  crops. 


20 

(3)  These  hinds  arc  certain  to  again  be  of  great  value,  and  it  is  for 
future  comparison  also  that  the  data  is  given  here.0 

THE   BIG   THOMPSON   DITCH. 

A  description  and  a  history  of  the  construction  and  management  of 
this  the  first  ditch  upon  the  Big  Thompson  of  which  there  is  any 
record  or  which  is  of  importance  at  the  present  time,  is  similar  to  that 
of  all  the  early  ditches  in  the  district,  and  much  of  what  is  said  will 
apply  as  well  to  other  districts  throughout  the  State.  According  to 
the  record  the  survey  and  construction  were  begun  November  10, 1861, 
the  ditch  being  a  neighborhood  enterprise  intended  to  water  the  lands 
of  a  number  of  adjoining  farms. 

Without  irrigation  the  grasses  of  the  meadow  lands  were  generally 
forced  to  maturity  by  the  hot  weather  and  the  want  of  moisture  before 
the  growing  season  was  really  over,  and  the  product  was  light,  although 
making  an  excellent  feed.  The  experiment  having  been  tried  in 
other  communities  with  good  results,  it  was  believed  that  the  applica- 
tion of  water  would  very  materially  lengthen  the  growing  season  and 
produce  a  much  greater  tonnage.  So  we  see  that  ditch  building  was 
almost  coincident  with  settlement. 

The  Big  Thompson  Ditch  was  some  8  miles  long,  covering  a  narrow 
strip  of  land,  seldom  more  than  a  mile  in  width  along  the  river  bottom, 
and  amounting  probably  to  less  than  3,000  acres,  being  almost  entirely 
ha}^  land  of  the  second  bottom.  The  decree  gives  the  ditch  90.5  cubic 
feet  of  water  per  second,  which  purports  to  be  the  amount  actually  car- 
ried at  times  by  the  ditch  and  necessary  for  the  land  watered.  While 
it  is  possible  that  the  ditch  had  a  capacity  equal  to  the  decree  and 
possibly  did  at  times  carry  that  amount,  it  is  hardly  credible  that  that 
quantity  was  either  necessaiy  or  carried  for  any  considerable  time. 

In  1897  28  cubic  feet  of  water  per  second  was  transferred  by  order 
of  the  district  court  to  the  Hillsboro  Ditch.  This  transfer  served 
two  purposes:  (1)  A  consolidation  of  interests  with  a  consequent 
decrease  of  expense  in  maintenance,  and  (2)  it  made  possible  the  irri- 
gation of  higher  and  better  land.  Such  a  transfer  could  hardly  be 
objected  to  by  outside  parties,  as  the  head  gate  of  the  Hillsboro 
Ditch  is  but  a  mile  above  that  of  the  Big  Thompson,  and  any  seepage 
water  previously  used  was  still  available,  and  if  the  full  appropriation 
had  formerly  been  diverted  to  irrigate  the  bottom  lands  its  use  on  the 
more  valuable  upland,  requiring  less  water,  was  certainly  wise.  In 
1897  the  superintendent  of  irrigation  made  transfers  of  individual 
shares  to  the  Hillsboro  Ditch  as  follows:  Two  of  14,  one  of  7,  and 
two  of  5  cubic  feet  per  second  each.     In  the  same  year  two  shares  of 

"The  prices  given  were  obtained  in  1901  and  have  already  very  materially 
changed. 


21 
5  cubic  feel  per  second  each  were  transferred  in  similar  manner  to  the 

Home  Supply  Ditch.  Permission  was  also  given  to  transfer  one  of  7 
cubic  feet  per  second  to  the  Loudon  Ditch.    This  transfer,  however,  is 

uncertain,  as  the  interests  of  the  Loudon  Ditch  appear  to  demand  a 
prohibition  of  transfers  of  all  kinds,  and  it  is  probable  that  this  com- 
pany will  resist  the  other  transfers  permitted  by  the  superintendent 
of  irrigation.  There  now  remains  in  the  Hie;  Thompson  Ditch  5i 
cubic  feet  of  water  per  second,  irrigating  some  500  acres,  with  a  pos- 
sibility of  the  return  of  62  cubic  feet  of  water  per  second  temporarily 
transferred  to  other  canals.  This  ditch  in  its  present  condition  can 
not  cany  to  exceed  25  cubic  feet  per  second.  It  in  all  probability  had 
been  in  that  condition  for  a  considerable  time  prior  to  the  transfers  of 
water.  From  data  at  hand  the  ditch  carried  but  22  cubic  feet  per 
second  in  1890  and  covered  but  640  acres  of  land.  The  value  of  land 
under  this  ditch  in  the  early  days  was  from  $10  to  $60  per  acre;  its 
value  now,  however,  is  about  $20  per  acre.  The  decrease  is  easily 
accounted  for  in  the  decline  in  the  price  of  wild  hay  from  $50  or  $100 
to  less  than  $10  per  ton,  together  with  the  fact  that  much  of  the  land 
has  become  water- logged. 

MARIANO  DITCH. 

The  ditch,  designated  as  priority  No.  3,  was  built  in  1862  by  a  Mexi- 
can by  the  name  of  Mariano  and  his  people,  to  irrigate  lands  on  the 
south  side  of  the  river.  The  ditch  was  small,  and  Mariano,  unable  to 
cope  with  American  energy  in  the  acquirement  and  perfection  of 
water  rights  and  the  holding  of  land,  at  length  found  himself  confined 
to  some  10  acres.  The  ditch  was  gradually  abandoned  and  is  now  a 
record  only.  This  was  the  first  private  ditch  in  the  district.  At  the 
time  of  the  decree  its  owners  claimed  for  it  a  capacity-  of  38.4  cubic 
feet  per  second;  however,  as  they  testified  that  it  irrigated  but  120 
acres,  and  although  the  referee  stated  that  there  was  insufficient  data 
for  granting  a  decree,  the  court  granted  3.12  cubic  feet  per  second,  or 
an  inch  (0.026  cubic  foot  per  second)  to  the  acre. 

THE  BIG   THOMPSON  AND  MANUFACTURING  COMPANY'S  DITCH. 

This  ditch  is  located  on  the  south  side  of  the  Big  Thompson,  about 
2  miles  west  of  Loveland.  It  is  less  than  7  miles  in  length,  covers 
about  1,300  acres  on  the  river  bottom,  and  was  the  first  ditch  in  the 
district  to  incorporate.  Its  first  decree  of  34.02  cubic  feet  per  second 
is  dated  April  1,  1863.  The  ditch  was  enlarged  and  extended  in  1861, 
acquiring  its  second  right  of  37.01  cubic  feet  per  second  May  1,  1861. 
In  1S67  the  head  gate  was  moved  farther  up  the  river  and  the  ditch  built 
to  cover  land  farther  back  from  the  river.     Being  much  larger  than  the 


22 

old  ditch,  it  acquired  its  third  right  of  05.47  cubic  foot  per  second. 
In  May,  L872,  it  claimed  a  fourth  appropriation  of  9.75  cubic  feet 
per  second,  making  a  total  of  146.25  cubic  feet  per  second.  From  the 
present  size  of  the  ditch,  its  locution,  and  the  amount  of  land  covered, 
it  docs  not  seem  possible  that  more  than  75  cubic  feet  per  second  was 
ever  carried,  and  at  present  it  does  not  run  to  exceed  25 cubic  feet  per 
second.  Some  ten  years  ago,  by  measurement,  it  had  a  maximum 
capacity  of  not  to  exceed  50  cubic  feet  per  second.  In  the  application 
of  the  claimants  for  a  decree  the  maximum  amount  of  land  claimed  to 
have  been  Irrigated  was  but  L, 500  acres,  while  the  land  susceptible  of 
irrigation  was  but  2,180  acres.  According  to  the  referee  the  capacity 
of  the  ditch  was  213  cubic  feet  per  second,  with  a  fall  of  25  feet  to  the 
mile  considerable  water  for  such  a  fall;  the  court,  however,  granted 
but  146.25  cubic  feet  per  second  for  the  2,180  acres,  something  over 
2^  inches  to  the  acre,  or,  for  the  1,500  acres  irrigated  a  duty  of  some- 
thing like  1(>  acres  to  the  cubic  foot  per  second.  Under  the  same 
ditch  on  the  same  land  the  duty  at  present  is  about  162  acres  to  the 
cubic  foot  per  second. 

Attention  is  called  here  to  the  table  under  the  heading  "Titles  to 
water."  page  64,  which  gives  a  summary  of  the  findings  of  the  court  on 
all  the  ditches. 

Transfers  have  been  made  as  follows: 

To  the  Home  Supply  Company,  by  sale,  24  cubic  feet  per  second; 
by  permission  of  the  superintendent  of  irrigation.  22  cubic  feet  per 
second  for  five  individuals,  the  amounts  being  10,  4,  3,  3,  and  2  cubic 
feet  per  second. 

To  the  Handy  Ditch,  6  cubic  feet  per  second,  by  permission. 

To  the  South  Side  Ditch,  6  cubic  feet  per  second,  by  permission. 

To  the  Farmers'  Ditch,  1^  cubic  feet  per  second,  by  order  of  the 
court. 

To  the  Loudon  Ditch,  1  cubic  foot  per  second,  by  permission. 

Against  this  transfer,  however,  the  Loudon  company  will  protest. 
If  the  estimate  of  75  cubic  feet  per  second  maximum  capacity  is  cor- 
rect, and  if  the  transfers  stand,  but  3.97  cubic  feet  per  second  remain 
of  tin1  water  used  before  the  transfers  for  this  ditch.  In  making  the 
sale  to  the  Home  Supply  Ditch  the  part  sold  was  not  all  of  one 
priority,  a  proportionate  amount  of  each  of  the  four  appropriations. 
approximately  one-sixth  of  each,  being  sold.  The  value  of  this  water 
in  the  Home  Supply  Canal  averages  probably  $1,000  per  cubic  foot 
per  second,  while  the  price  paid  is  said  to  have  been  $400  per  cubic 
foot  per  second.  The  land  being  much  the  same  as  under  the  Big 
Thompson,  has.  as  a  whole,  decreased  in  value;  some  of  the  land, 
however,  is  excellent  and  worth  probably  $50  per  acre. 

There  are  no  reservoirs'  or  reservoir  sites  under  this  ditch. 


28 

THE  FARMERS1  IRRIGATING  DITCH. 

By  successive  enlargements  this  ditch  has  the  following  rights: 

Decreed  rights  of  Farmers*  Irrigating  l>it<-li. 

Cable  feel 
per  second. 

May  1,  1864 5.72 

June  l.  L868 :MH> 

Angusl  l,  lsrs 54.08 

Total 62.  40 

It  is  located  just  south  of  Loveland  on  the  north  bank  of  the  river; 
it  is  about  9  miles  in  length  and  covers  4,500  acres  of  land  worth  $15 
per  acre.     The  area  irrigated  is  probably  nearly  3,000acres.     It  has 

30  shares,  of  a  value  of  £1.200  each:  each  share  supposed  to  be  suffi- 
cient for  160  acres.  This  ditch  carries  1^  cubic  feet  of  water  per  sec- 
ond, decreed  to  the  Big  Thompson  and  Manufacturing  Company's  Ditch 
by  order  of  the  district  court.  Had  the  amount  been  larger  the  trans- 
fer would  probably  have  been  resisted  by  other  ditches  injuriously 
affected. 

The  annual  expenses  on  the  ditch  average  for  superintendence  $300 
and  for  repairs  $300. 

The  capacity  at  present  is  about  equal  to  its  decreed  rights. 

There  are  no  reservoirs  or  reservoir  sites  under  this  ditch.  Con- 
sidering the  amount  of  water  allowed  per  acre  cultivated  for  the  Big 
Thompson  and  Manufacturing  Company's  Ditch,  the  amount  of  water 
decreed  this  ditch  seems  to  be  very  small.  Although  this  ditch  was 
actually  irrigating  one-third  more  land  and  had  under  it  twice  as  much 
land  as  the  manufacturing  company's  ditch,  its  decree  is  less  than 
one-half  as  large.  Though  the  character  of  the  land  under  each  is 
similar,  the  court  sawT  no  inconsistency  in  its  decrees. 

THE  BIG  THOMPSON  IRRIGATING  DITCH. 

Having  priority  No.  5  in  the  district,  this  ditch  is  locally  designated 
as  "No.  5  ditch."  It  is  some  5  miles  long  and  covers  about  1.000  acres 
of  land  along  the  river  bottom. 

Considerable  controversy  has  arisen  over  the  decrees  of  this  ditch 
and  its  capacity  in  connection  with  its  sale  to  the  Handy  Ditch  Com- 
pany. 

The  head  of  the  ditch  was  located  some  2  miles  southeast  of  Love- 
land,  and  since  1895  has  not  been  used.  The  decree  is  for  78  <  ubic 
feet  per  second,  of  date  of  February  25,  1865,  which  the  Handy  Ditch 
Company  purchased  in  1897,  together  with  the  land  covered  by  the 
ditch.  Upon  application  to  the  superintendent  of  irrigation  in  1897 
to  transfer  the  full  78  cubic  feet  per  second  he  allowed  4<»  cubic  feet 
per  second  to  be  changed,  provided  the  old  ditch  be  abandoned.     On 


•24 

appeal  to  the  State  engineer  thai  official  caused  the  line  of  the  old  ditch 

to  be  carefully  surveyed  and  its  cross  section  determined.     The  result 

of  the  survey  showed  that  the  ditch  could  carry  more  than  78  cubic 
feel  per  second,  even  taking  the  Least  cross  section  and  Lightest  grade 
found  as  a  basis  of  calculation.  The  State  engineer,  therefore,  ordered 
the  entire  decree  to  he  transferred,  which  resulted  in  suit  being 
brought,  under  the  the  title  of  "The  Loudon  Irrigating  (anal  Co.  /•. 
the  Handy  Ditch  Co.  et  al."  This  case  i-  given  more  fully  later.  At 
present  the  Handy  Ditch  is  allowed  to  draw  not  more  than  20  cubic 
feet  per  second  of  this  water.  In  obtaining  a  decree  the  capacity  as 
claimed  by  the  owners  was  hut  75  cubic  feet  per  second,  but  notwith- 
standing this  the  decree  grants  7s  feet  per  second,  or  3  "inches"  of 
water  per  acre.  The  size  of  the  ditch  i-  given  as  s  feel  on  the  bottom. 
14  feet  on  top.  3  miles  in  length,  2i  feet  in  depth,  with  a  fall  of  L0  feet 
to  the  mile. 

THE  LOVELAND  AND  GREELEY  CANAL. 

The  eanal  or,  rather,  system  of  canals  and  reservoirs  which  _ 
under  this  name  is  one  of  the  most  important  in  the  district,  extend- 
ing, as  it  does,  from  a  point  on  the  Big  Thompson  some  3  miles  west  of 
Loveland  nearly  to  the  town  of  Greeley,  supplying  water  along  its 
entire  course  to  more  than  21,000  acres,  the  greater  part  of  which  lies 
near  Greeley  and  on  both  the  Big  Thompson  and  Cache  la  Poudre 
slopes.  The  name  Loveland  and  Greeley  was  applied  to  the  main 
canal  as  it  was  enlarged.  The  head  gate  is  located  in  sec.  17.  T.  5  N., 
R.  69  W.,  and  the  system  embraces  the  old  Larimer  County  Irrigating 
and  Manufacturing  Ditch,  commonly  called  the  Chubbuck  Ditch,  with 
its  priorities  as  follows: 

Decreed  rights  of  Chubbuck  Ditch. 

Cubic  feet 
per  second. 

November  1,  1865 - 

October  20,  1 870 30.  04 

Octol)er  25,  1873 35.  50 

Total 82.  !»0 

This  total  of  S2.90  cubic  feet  per  second,  added  to  the  decree  of 
April  1,  1881,  of  297. 44.  makes  a  total  of  380.34  cubic  feet  per  second. 
With  this  latter  enlargement  (the  extension  of  the  canal  by  the  Boom- 
erang and  Grapevine  laterals)  it  covered  some  30,000  acres.  The  old 
Larimer  County  Irrigating  and  Manufacturing  Ditch  at  the  time  of  its 
decree  covered  about  2.100  acres,  of  which  1,800  were  irrigated.  In 
acquiring  this  ditch  the  Loveland  and  Greeley  Irrigating  and  Land 
Company  guaranteed  to  the  owners  thereof  a  perpetual  free  and  first 
right  to  the  water  of  the  canal  at  such  times  as  it  was  needed  and  in 
amount  to  the  full  extent  of  their  priorities.  The  company  does  not. 
however,  furnish  reservoir  water  under  this  agreement.     The  amount 


25 

of  land  so  irrigated  amounts  t<»  about  3,100  acres,  and  tin1  amount  of 
free  water  furnished  is  L,815  inches  under  a  2-inch  pressure. 
The  Barnes  Ditch  was  another  acquirement  by  the  company  under 

similar  agreement,  the  company  furnishing  free  water  to  the  extent 
of  2.  LOO  statutory  inches.  The  land  watered,  however,  scarcely  exceeds 
1,000  acres.     The  Barnes  Ditch  had  four  priorities,  as  follows: 

Decreed  riglUs  of  Harms  />i/,-h. 

Cubic  feet 
per  second. 

October20,  L865 18.56 

June  1,  L867 12.06 

June23,  is?:; 19.93 

November  1,  L878 15.20 

T< >tal 05.  75 

The  ditch  was  acquired  and  enlarged  as  a  feeder  to  Lake  Loveland, 
and  when  in  good  repair  has  a  capacity  of  more  than  400  cubic  feet 
per  second.  The  total  decreed  right  of  the  Loveland  and  Greeley 
Canal  is  446.09  cubic  feet  per  second. 

Four  kinds  of  rights  exist  under  this  system — the  old  Larimer 
County  Irrigation  and  Manufacturing  Ditch  free  rights,  the  old  Barnes 
Ditch  free  rights,  the  rights  under  the  Loveland  and  Greeley  Canal 
proper,  and  the  Lake  Loveland  Reservoir  rights.  A  piece  of  land 
may  have  a  reservoir  right  with  either  of  the  others,  or  a  reservoir 
right  alone.  There  are  208  rights  of  80  acres  each  under  the  Love- 
land and  Greeley  Canal  proper,  of  which  205  are  in  use;  under  the 
reservoir  are  300  rights  of  80  acres  each,  of  which  175  are  in  use. 
There  is  considerable  land  covered  by  no  water  right  that  lies  under 
the  ditch  and  the  reservoir  whose  outlet  is  the  ditch,  and  it  is  probable 
that  some  of  this  land  is  watered.  A  water  right,  being  about  1.44 
cubic  feet  per  second,  is  made  to  cover  much  more  than  80  acres,  the 
waste  and  seepage  water  being  used. 

The  range  of  value  of  the  land  is  considerable,  but  $75  per  acre  is 
not  uncommon  even  for  160-acre  tracts,  'especially  if  it  possesses 
both  ditch  and  reservoir  rights. 

THE  BIG  THOMPSON  AND  PLATTE  RIVER  DITCH. 

This  ditch  is  located  at  the  extreme  lower  end  of  the  district,  just 
above  the  mouth  of  the  Little  Thompson,  from  which  it  draws  some 
seepage  water.  It  has  two  priorities,  one  dated  November  18,  1865, 
for  35  cubic  feet  per  second,  and  one  dated  May  15, 1870,  for  86.18 
cubic  feet  per  second.  Its  first  priority  is  supplied  principally  from 
seepage.  The  ditch  covers  about  1,800  acres  between  the  Big  Thomp- 
son and  the  Platte  River,  and  has  a  carrying  capacity  of  about  40  cubic 
feet  per  second.  The  cost  of  maintenance,  including  supervision,  is 
about  $500  per  year.     This  ditch  is  a  source  of  very  little  trouble  to 


26 

the  commissioner,  he  having  to  visit  it  seldom,  as  there  is  generally 
enough  seepage  to  supply  its  needs  when  water  is  scarce. 

HIST  AND  GOSS  DITCH. 

This  is  a  small  ditch  on  the  south  side  of  the  river,  and  is  used  to 
irrigate  portions  of  two  farms,  that  of  Mr.  Percy  D.  Goss  and  of  the 
Buckingham  estate,  in  all  about  300  acres.     Its  capacity  at  present  is 

about  20  cubic  feet  per  second,  and  it  is  some  2  miles  long.  Its 
priorities  are,  March  20, 1866,  6.41  cubic  feet  per  second,  and  April  15, 
L8T5,  80.07  cubic  feet  per  second.  According  to  the  findings  of  the 
referee,  but  400  acres  were  covered  by  both  appropriations,  and  but 
%2'2^>  acres  actually  irrigated,  while  the  amount  actually  appropriated 
was  4.68  cubic  feet  per  second.  A  third  enlargement  was  claimed,  but 
not  allowed.  Also,  according  to  the  findings,  the  land  requires  0.0208 
cubic  foot  per  second  per  acre,  or  a  total  of  8.32  cubic  feet  per  second, 
but  in  the  face  of  this  the  court  grants  86.48  cubic  feet  per  second, 
more  than  ten  times  what  was  apparently  recommended  by  the  referee. 
There  are  no  reservoirs  under  this  ditch,  but  the  decree  seems  to 
be  ample  without  one. 

HILL  AND  BRUSH  DITCH. 

This  is  a  small  private  ditch  on  the  north  side  of  the  river,  near  the 
lower  end  of  the  district,  It  is  about  5  miles  long,  and  has  a  maxi- 
mum capacity  of  15  cubic  feet  per  second,  but  a  decree  of  61.8  cubic 
feet  per  second.  The  referee  says  as  this  ditch  covered  1,500  acres, 
and  required  0.0208  cubic  foot  per  second  per  acre  it  had  acquired  a 
right  to  31.2  cubic  feet  per  second  ub3T  construction,"  though  its 
owners  claimed  for  it  69  cubic  feet  per  second.  The  court,  disregard- 
ing the  findings  and  recommendations  of  the  referee,  gave  the  ditch  a 
decree  of  61.8  cubic  feet  per  second. 

THE  LOUDON  DITCH. 

The  Loudon  Ditch  is  the  highest  on  the  stream  on  the  north  side, 
waters  land  on  the  Cache  la  Poudre  slope,  and  is  one  of  the  most 
important  in  the  district.  It  has  good  and  large  priorities,  but,  hav- 
ing no  reservoirs,  is  short  on  late  water.  There  are  a  few  private 
reservoirs,  and  some  good  sites  which  might  be  utilized.  It  is  some 
26  miles  in  length,  counting  its  more  important  laterals,  irrigates  more 
than  10,000  acres,  and  covers  about  13,000  acres.  Its  capacity  is  equal 
to  its  first  two  decrees.  This  ditch  originally  covered  400  acres,  of 
which  one-half  was  irrigated.  The  referee  says  that  the  capacity  of 
this  old  ditch  was  21.19  cubic  feet  per  second,  but  that  40  cubic  feet 
per  second  were  claimed,  and  it  was  so  allowed.  The  canal  has  two 
later  appropriations — 154.3  cubic  feet  per  second  November  1,  1877, 
and  L23.48  cubic  feet  per  second  September  17,  1883.  It  is  carrying 
:it  present  '.♦  cubic  feet  per  second  of  transferred  water;  8  cubic  feet  per 


second  from  the  Big  Thompson  No.  1  and  1  cubic  loot  per  second  from 
the  Big  Thompson  and  Manufacturing  Company's  Ditch.  However, 
the  management  deny  that  they  recognize  the  transfers.  Land  under 
this  ditch  is  valued  at  $60  per  acre. 

THE  GEORGE  RIST  DITCH. 

The  ditch  is  used  to  irrigate  land  belonging  to  the  Buckingham 
estate  only,  about  L,800  acres,  and  has  a  capacity  of  66  cubic  feet  per 
second.  Formerly  its  capacity  was  less  than  half  that  amount,  but 
when  the  Mariano  Lake  was  put  to  use  by  the  Home  Supply  Ditch 
Company,  it  purchased  a  right  of  way  through  this  ditch,  enlarging  it 
and  making  it  a  feeder  for  the  lake.  Besides  a  money  consideration 
for  the  right  of  way,  the  company  assumes  the  cost  of  maintenance  for 
its  use.  The  ditch  has  oik1  decree  only,  of  195  cubic  feet  per  second. 
of  date  May  1,  1878,  though  application  for  decree  was  made  under 
two  dates — May  1,  1873,  and  July  9,  1875.  There  had  been  actually 
irrigated  in  the  first  case  but  100  acres,  and  in  the  second  2,400  acres. 

HILLSBORO   DITCH. 

This  is  the  most  important  of  the  lower  ditches,  as  well  as  one  of 
the  largest  in  the  district.  It  extends  from  a  point  on  the  south  bank  of 
the  Big  Thompson,  some  5  miles  below  Loveland,  in  a  curve  around 
to  and  across  the  Little  Thompson,  and  irrigates  some  land  on  the 
south  side  of  that  stream,  where  there  is  a  reservoir  to  aid  in  regulat- 
ing the  distribution  of  the  water.  The  present  capacity  of  the  ditch 
is  greater  than,  or  at  least  equal  to,  its  decree  of  153.4  cubic  feet  per 
second.  This  ditch  has  practically  absorbed  the  Big  Thompson  No.  1 
ditch  and  covers  all  the  latter's  land.  It  has  acquired  by  purchase  28 
cubic  feet  per  second,  and  by  the  transfer  of  five  individual  rights  45 
cubic  feet  per  second  more,  carrying,  therefore,  73  cubic  feet  per  sec- 
ond of  the  Big  Thompson  No.  1  water.  It  covers  nearly  9,000  acres 
and  actually  irrigates  5,000  acres  or  more.  Its  stock  is  divided  into 
108  shares,  serving  80  acres  each,  valued  at  $400  per  share;  the  cost  of 
maintenance  is  less  than  $900  per  year,  and  an  assessment  of  $11  per 
share  yearly  covers  all  costs  of  maintenance,  superintendence,  and  a 
certain  amount  of  interest  on  borrowed  money.  Each  share  is  pre- 
sumed to  furnish  60  " inches"  when  needed,  though  much  less  suffices. 
This  ditch  has  three  decrees,  as  follows: 

Decreed  rights  of  Hillsboro  Ditch. 


Date. 

Quantity. 

Cubic  feet 
p<  r  s<  e. 

-  25 
99.  4t> 
45.69 

Area. 

October  15,  1ST  1 

Acres. 
300 

April  15,  1878 

1,S00 

October  6,  1881 

3,000 

28 

There  seems  here  to  be  rather  a  flexible  rule  for  estimating  th< 
amount  of  water  required  per  acre  in  granting  the  decree.  Its  con- 
struction is  said  to  have  been  "difficult,"  probably  due  to  the  fact  that 
an  attempt  was  here  made  to  get  water  up  on  to  the  mesa.  Others  oi 
later  const  ruction  arc  accounted  "easy  of  construction'1  under  similar 
circumstances. 

THE  HANDY  DITCH. 

The  head  gate  of  this  ditch  (see  frontispiece)  is  the  highest  on  the 
river,  and  the  ditch  covers  the  highest  Irrigated  land  on  the  south  side. 
It  is  about  22  miles  long,  covering  some  15,000  acres  and  actually  irri- 
gating more  than  12.500.  Its  capacity  is  about  250  cubic  feet  per  sec- 
ond, and  it  is  used  Largely  to  till  the  numerous  private  reservoirs 
under  it.  A  large  part  of  the  area  irrigated  lies  on  the  Little  Thomp- 
son slope,  which  is  accounted  the  best  land  in  the  district;  certain  it  is 
that  the  land  under  this  and  the  Home  Supply  Ditch  lies  ideally  for 
irrigating  and  is  wonderfully  productive,  and.  taken  as  a  whole,  will 
average  $50  per  acre  in  price.  This  ditch  is  unfortunate  in  the  small- 
ness  of  its  first  decree  and  in  its  not  possessing  reservoirs  to  furnish 
late  water.  Both  these  defects  are  largely  counterbalanced  by  the 
numerous  private  reservoirs  under  it.  This  ditch  is  especially  famous 
on  account  of  its  lawsuits,  and  will  be  frequently  referred  to  hereafter 
in  that  connection.  As  to  its  priorities,  it  has  one  of  February  28, 
1878,  for  31.2  cubic  feet  per  second  and  one  of  December  15,  1880,  of 
111.23  cubic  feet  per  second. 

The  findings  of  the  referee  are  different  in  this  case  from  those  to 
wThich  attention  has  been  called.  The  application  states  that  there  were 
10,000  acres  under  the  canal  February  28,  1878,  and  that  the  amount 
claimed  was  520  cubic  feet  per  second.  The  referee  then  says  that  the 
amount  of  water  appropriated  was  31.2  cubic  feet  per  second.  Of  his 
own  volition  he  states:  "I  find,  further,  that  the  ditch  was  enlarged." 
The  owners  never  claimed  an  enlargement  in  their  application.  The 
facts  were  that  the  ditch  was  built  the  first  year  full  size  to  a  rock  cut, 
and  beyond  the  rock  cut  full  size  again;  but  in  order  to  get  water  for 
the  crops  of  that  year  the  cut  was  not  built  full  size,  but  was  com- 
pleted two  years  later.  The  referee  evidently  considered  the  capacity 
of  a  ditch  the  capacit}x  of  its  smallest  part,  and  the  court  agreed  with 
him.  This  was  really  the  beginning  and  cause  of  the  Handy  Ditch's 
subsequent  legal  contests,  though  most  of  the  cases  involved  in  no 
way  the  decree  to  the  Handy.  The  Handy  Ditch  Company  has 
acquired  by  purchase  the  Big  Thompson  Irrigation  Ditch,  known  as 
No.  5.  with  a  priority  of  78  cubic  feet  per  second.  As  stated  before, 
it  is  now  allowed  to  draw  20  cubic  feet  per  second  of  this  water,  and  it 
lias  had  transferred  to  it  <i  cubic  feet  per  second  from  No.  2,  or  the  Big 
Thompson  and  Manufacturing  Company's  Ditch,  so  that  it  has  26  cubic 


U.  S.  Dept.  of  Agr.,  Bui.  1  18,  Office  of  E.*pt.  Stations.      Irrigation  Investigations. 


Plate  II. 


29 

feet  of  water  per  second  <>i'  very  early  priority,  besides  it-  first  31.2 
cubic  feet  per  second  to  supply  domestic  needs  and  Late  crops. 

THE  SOUTH  SIDE  DITCH. 

This  is  a  small  ditch  beading  jus!  inside  the  canyon,  with  only  the 
Handy  and  Home  Supply  ditches  above  it  on  the  river.  It  covers 
about  2,000  acres  and  irrigates  nearly  that  area:  it  bas  a  capacity  of 
less  than  35  cubic  feet  per  second,  though  its  decree  calls  for  50.3 
cubic  feet  per  second.  The  acreage  and  capacity  at  the  time  of  the 
flecree  was  about  one-half  of  this  amount,  the  enlargement  being  made 
in  consequence  of  the  purchase  of  water  from  the  Big  Thompson  and 
Manufacturing  Company's  Ditch.  The  amount  purchased  was  6  cubic 
feet  per  second  and  the  price  $1,500.  The  ditch  stock  is  divided  into 
175  shares  at  £5<>  per  share,  and  a  share  is  supposed  to  irrigate  L0 
acres.  The  land  under  this  ditch  has  an  average  value  of  $40  per  acre. 
The  cost  of  maintenance  and  of  superintendence  is  about  $100  per 
year  each. 

THE  HOME  SUPPLY  DITCH. 

This  ditch,  the  second  on  the  river,  is  likewise  one  of  the  largest  and 
most  important  in  the  district.  It,  with  the  Handy,  irrigates  by  far 
the  greater  part  of  the  land  on  the  south  side.  It  is  finely  constructed, 
with  a  good  masonry  dam  in  the  river  (PI.  II).  The  upper  end  is  in 
a  rock  cut,  and  its  rating  Hume  is  the  most  permanent  on  the  river. 
The  canal  with  its  laterals  is  some  32  miles  long  and  covers  19,000 
acres,  actually  irrigating  18,000  acres.  It  has  the  best  reservoir  system 
in  the  district,  running  water  from  its  reservoirs  directly  onto  the  land 
and  exchanging  with  the  river.  Notwithstanding  its  very  late  priority, 
its  lands  are  as  well  supplied  as  any.  Under  it  are  a  relatively  large 
percentage  of  the  late  crops;  winter  wheat,  in  particular,  being  raised, 
the  acreage  of  which  is  increasing  every  year.  The  yield  is  in  excess 
of  30  bushels  of  wheat  per  acre.  There  are  2,001  shares  in  the  com- 
pany, each  15  shares  equal  to  a  160-acre  water  right.  The  value  per 
share  is  £150.  practically  $10  per  acre.  In  1881  this  company  acquired 
the  Lone  Tree  Reservoir  and  in  1888  the  Mariano  Lake.  It  has  pur- 
chased 24  cubic  feet  of  water  per  second  from  the  Big  Thompson  Man- 

,  ufacturing  Ditch,  at  a  price  said  to  be  $1,000  per  cubic  foot  per  second. 

!  Figuring  the  value  of  a  foot  from  the  value  of  the  shares,  it  would 
be  $2,250,  As  this,  however,  includes  reservoir  rights  as  well,  it  is 
hardly  a  fair  estimate  of  the  value  of  a  cubic  foot  of  water  per  second. 

i  It  is  said  by  parties  under  the  ditch  that  as  much  water  is  run  in 

:  September  as  in  June.     This  is  nearer  the  truth  under  the  Home  Sup- 
ply than  under  any  other  ditch  or  system  of  the  district;  at  the  same 
time  its  entire  accuracy  is  open  to  question. 
The  ditch  has  acquired  by  the  transfer  of  the  shares  of  live  different 


30 

parties  L0,  4,  3,  3,  and  2  cubic  feet  of  water  per  second  from  the  Big 
Thompson  No.  1  ditch,  for  the  carrying  of  which  they  charge  50  per 
cent  of  the  water  carried. 

The  cost  of  operation  is  for  superintendence  $1,500  and  for  repair;: 
about  $350  per  year. 

RESERVOIRS. 

The  reservoir  system  of  district  No.  4,  while  not  as  complicated  a^ 
that  of  district  No.  3,a  is  as  well  developed  and  as  efficient.  No  more 
water  escapes  from  district  No.  4:  than  from  district  No.  3,  and  prob- 
ably not  as  much.  Its  inlet  ditches  are  comparatively  short  and  the 
reservoirs  lie  at  a  good  elevation,  making  it  unnecessary  in  all  but  one 
case  to  discharge  into  the  river  and  take  water  in  exchange. 

Almost  all  the  reservoir  sites  are  found  to  be  natural  depressions. 
These  depressions  often  form  natural  reservoirs  and  contain  water 
drained  into  them  from  the  surrounding  lands;  others  have  the  rim 
depressed  at  one  point,  and  through  this  break  the  water  escapes.  In 
improving  the  sites  a  dam  is  thrown  across  the  lowest  point  in  the  rim 
and  the  capacity  of  the  reservoir  largely  increased.  The  dams  are 
generally  of  earth  riprapped  with  stone,  with  outlet  pipes  running 
through  them,  controlled  by  valves. 

The  soil  in  these  reservoirs  being  the  washings  from  the  surrounding 
lands  and  of  an  adobe  or  clay  character,  is  almost  impervious,  and  forms 
an  excellent  bottom,  through  which  very  little  water  escapes. 

Very  few  reservoirs  have  been  made  by  placing  dams  across  water 
courses,  as  they  are  much  more  expensive,  as  well  as  more  dangerous, 
the  sudden  floods  often  endangering  the  structures  and  necessitating 
the  construction  of  proper  wasteways  and  constant  watching.  In  such 
reservoirs,  also,  considerable  annoyance  and  expense  is  incurred  on 
account  of  the  necessity  for  allowing  the  natural  flow  to  pass  unimpeded 
through  them  when  the  water  is  needed  for  direct  irrigation  by  the 
ditches  below. 

Fortunately,  there  is  an  abundance  of  good  natural  sites  in  this  dis- 
trict other  than  those  found  in  the  beds  of  the  streams.  Some  excel- 
lent sites  which  exist  in  the  mountains  have  not  been  utilized,  as  those 
in  the  immediate  vicinity  of  the  farms  could  be  constructed  more 
cheaply  and  more  easily  controlled.  Storing  water  in  the  mountains 
necessitates  the  use  of  the  river  channel  to  convey  it  to  the  head  of 
the  ditch  which  carries  it  to  the  land  irrigated.  Here  a  division  of  the 
reservoir  water  and  the  natural  flow  of  the  stream  must  be  made. 

"In  U.  S.  Dept.  Agr.,  Office  of  Experiment  Station?,  Bulletin  No.  92,  on  "The 
Reservoir  System  of  the  Cache  la  Poudre  Valley,"  by  the  late  E.  S.  Nettleton,  will 
be  found  an  excellent  description  of  the  reservoirs  and  reservoir  sites  of  district  No.  3. 
What  is  there  said  is  equally  true  of  the  reservoirs  of  district  No.  4.  The  general 
physical  characteristics  and  the  method  of  management,  construction,  and  distri- 
bution are  the  same. 


31 

Losses  occur  in  transit  from  numerous  causes.  To  have  a  keeper  at 
the  lake  is  an  expense,  and  communication  between  the  lake  and  the 

farm  is  slow  and  difficult. 

On  the  Big  Thompson  few  reservoirs  are  owned  by  the  ditch  com- 
panies or  by  tin4  users  in  common;  the  majority  being  private  in  their 
character,  are  used  principally  to  irrigate  the  lands  of  the  owners.     If 

a  reservoir  owner  has  a  surplus,  however,  he  may  sell  water  to  his 
neighbors.  Becoming  a  chattel  when  stored,  reservoir  water  i-  under 
the  absolute  control  of  its  owner,  and  valuable  accordingly. 

Reservoirs  were  developed  much  later  than  ditches,  for  until  a 
scarcity  was  felt  there  was  no  necessity  for  them.  Prior  to  the  time, 
however,  when  such  necessity  existed,  reservoirs  were,  nevertheless, 
coming  into  existence  through  natural  causes  and  through  no  effort  on 
the  part  of  the  irrigator.  In  the  natural  depressions  mentioned,  the 
surplus,  the  waste,  and  seepage  water  found  a  resting  place.  Land 
being  abundant,  no  effort  was  made  to  drain  the  natural  lakes  so 
formed,  which  were  found  to  be  useful  for  stock  purposes.  Later  fish 
were  put  into  them,  ice  was  cut,  and  in  numerous  ways  their  conven- 
ience and  value  became  apparent.  When  the  ditches  were  not  running, 
it  was  soon  discovered  that  by  a  little  labor  in  excavating  a  trench 
through  the  rim  water  could  be  taken  from  these  lakes  for  irrigating 
early  crops  or  for  plowing,  and  the  uses  naturally  grew  as  water 
became  more  scarce.  This  was  the  condition  until  about  1880,  when 
it  began  to  be  recognized  that  the  rivers  were  overappropriatcd  dur- 
ing low  water,  and  the  ditches  constructed  about  that  time  saw  in 
stored  water  their  only  assurance  of  an  adequate  suppl}\  The  Home 
Supply  Ditch  Compan}T  was  the  first  deliberately  to  build  a  canal  in 
the  face  of  a  short  supply  with  the  avowed  purpose  of  storing  the 
floods  and  using  reservoir  water  as  its  main  supply.  Its  wisdom 
has  been  demonstrated  by  the  success  of  this  canal  and  reservoir  sys- 
tem, which,  notwithstanding  the  lateness  of  the  decree,  always  has 
an  abundance  of  water.  Before  1880  there  was  little  diversity  in  the 
crops  sown  in  the  district.  Aside  from  native  hay,  grain  was  the  prin- 
cipal product  and  required  irrigation  at  about  the  time  of  the  maxi- 
mum discharge  of  the  river.  These  conditions,  together  with  a  more 
evenly  distributed  as  wTell  as  later  maximum  How  than  now,  delayed 
the  recognition  of  the  overappropriation  of  the  river  and  the  neces- 
sity for  reservoirs.  The  increase  of  the  area  cultivated  at  length 
showred  the  overappropriation  and  the  growing  of  alfalfa  increased  the 
demand  for  late  water  for  the  irrigation  of  its  second  and  third  crops. 

Requiring  little  engineering  skill  and  but  a  small  amount  of  capital 
and  labor,  the  construction  of  the  reservoirs  kept  pace  with  the  demand 
until  now  the  time  has  arrived  when  there  is  a  scarcity  of  water  for 
storage  purposes.  With  the  numerous  demands  upon  the  river,  unless 
the  reservoir  has  a  fairly  early  priority,  or  is  small,  or  has  a  very  large 


32 

supply  canal,  it  often  happens  that  the  short  high  flood  period  is  not 
sufficient  to  till  the  reservoir.  This  condition  has  retarded  reservoir 
construction  somewhat,  the  greater  growth  being  in  increasing  the 
capacity  of  reservoirs  already  constructed  and  in  enlarging  the  inlet 

canals.  There  are  numerous  undeveloped  sites  in  the  district,  the 
more  important  of  which  are  enumerated  further  on.  By  the  use  of 
these  and  the  enlargement  of  the  inlet  canals  very  little  water  indeed 
would  escape  and  then  only  in  time  of  unusual  Hoods. 

The  great  incentive  at  present  for  the  construction  of  reservoirs  is  to 
supply  water  to  late  crops;  sugar  beets  are  becoming  a  factor  in  the 
water  problem  and  require  considerable  late  water;  potatoes  likewise 
require  irrigation  late  in  the  season,  and  winter  wheat,  now  so  popu- 


TtrSu 


JAN. 
10  20 


FEB. 
10  20 


MARCH 
10  20 


APRIL 
10  20 


MAY 
10  20 


JUNE 
10  20 


C93 


TZW^ 


JULY 
10  20 


AUG. 
10  20 


SEPT. 
10  20 


OCT. 
10  20 


NOV. 
10  20 


DEC. 
10  20 


y<r  (/ire 


Fi<;.  1.— Diagram  showing  the  water  supply  from  Big  Thompson  Creek,  and  the  manner  of  its  use. 

lar,  must  be  irrigated  in  the  fall.  With  alfalfa,  followed  by  potatoes 
and  beets,  and  these  in  turn  followed  by  winter  wheat,  even  the  rota- 
tion of  crops  docs  not  lessen  the  demand  for  reservoir  water.  In  the 
diagram  (fig.  1)  the  average  water  supply  for  the  different  months  of 
the  year  is  represented  graphically,  platted  to  accord  with  the  figures 
given  in  the  tables  of  discharge.  It  will  be  seen  that  there  is  a  surplus 
available  for  storage  from  October  to  June,  while  there  is  a  demand 
for  stored  water  during  June,  July,  August,  and  September.  On  the 
plat  the  dotted  lines  represent  the  average  amount  of  water  used  during 
each  month.  In  arriving  at  these  quantities  estimates  were  obtained 
from  several  of  the  former  water  commissioners  and  from  the  present 
commissioner  of  the  amount  of  water  used  for  direct  irrigation  each 
month  and  the  amount  drawn  from  reservoirs.     They  furnished  esti- 


33 

unites  also  of  the  percentage  which  would  be  used  each  month,  if 
the  irrigators  under  the  present  crop  conditions  could  have  the  water 
whenever  they  wished. 

Similar  statements  and  estimates  were  obtained  from  several  of  the 
officials  of  the  larger  ditches  mid  from  such  consumers  as  could  be 
reached.  With  these  statements,  and  a  knowledge  of  the  average 
How  for  each  month,  the  conclusions  were  as  shown  on  the  diagram. 
The  opinions  unci  figures  were  remarkably  uniform  in  general  state 
ment,  the  greatest  difference  of  opinion  being  as  to  the  relative  use  of 
water  for  July  and  for  August.  Those  contending  thai  the  use  was 
greater  in  August  were  under  a  ditch  with  good  reservoirs,  while 
those  who  believed  it  was  the  greater  in  July  were  irrigating  with  water 
direct  from  the  river.  The  commissioners  were  inclined  to  believe 
the  use  in  July  was  the  greater,  and,  considering  the  flow  in  the  stream, 
such  appears  to  he  the  case.  The  figures  on  which  the  diagram  is  based 
are  e/iven  in  the  following  table: 


WaU  r  supply  from  the  Big  Thompson  liner,  with  the  average  amount  of  water  used,  variovs 
uses  t,i  which  it  is  [ml,  and  probable  time  of  use  of  additional  stored  water. 


Direct  irrigation. 

Average  amount  of 

Water 
unused. 

Possible 
increase 

of  stor- 
age. 

Month. 

Average 
discharge 

of  river. 

Average 
used. 

Amount 
necessary 
to  supply 
demand. 

reservoir  water. 

Time  of 
increased 

Used. 

Stored. 

use. 

i  'ubicfeet 
pt  ,■  sec. 

60 
GO 
100 

Cubic  feet 
p<  e  sec. 

00 

00 

00 

75 

B50 

050 

400 

220 

100 

25 

00 

00 

Cubic  feet 

p,  r  s,r. 

00 

00 

00 

75 

350 

1,000 

800 

700 

400 

25 

00 

00 

Cubic  Jut 

pre  s<  C. 

00 

00 

00 

00 

00 

50 

250 

350 

00 

00 

00 

00 

Cubic  Jut 

per  sec. 
30 
30 
70 
150 
150 

Cubic  feet 
per  sec. 
30 
30 
30 
25 
41 

Cubic  Jut 
i>'_  r  si  c. 
20 
20 
20 
20 
30 
20 
15 
5 
00 

it; 

20 
20 

Cubic  feet 

p>  r  sic. 

April 

May 

250 
644 

834 
165 

230 

111 

71 

54 

00 

150  1              34 
35  !              30 
00  !              10 
11                00 
30                16 
30  1              24 
30                30 

10 

Julv 

40 

August 

106 

50 

Average 

Acre-feet 

237 
171,729 

1 

100, 27 i 

43, 170 

43, 170         18, 287 

12, 389 

12,  389 

The  first  column  is  simply  the  recorded  flow  of  the  stream;  the 
second  is  an  average  of  the  amount  of  water  used  directly  on  the  land, 
and  is  the  result  of  a  comparison  of  the  reports  of  the  superintendent 
and  of  the  commissioners  of  irrigation  who  have  direct  control  of  the 
water  distribution.  The  ilow  of  the  stream  as  recorded,  and  the  fact 
that  much  of  the  loss  is  during  extensive  Hoods,  though  this  loss  is 
generally  for  a  very  short  period,  have  been  considered  in  making  the 
table.  The  conclusions  given  in  the  third  column  are  taken  from  fig- 
ures furnished  Irv  the  superintendents  and  commissioners,  and  it  is 
probably  the  most  nearly  correct  column  in  the  table.  After  June  and 
until  October  there  is  a  greater  demand  than  the  average  flow  of  the 
stream,  and  yet  during  June  and  July  water  is  stored.  The  demand 
2817— No.  118—02 3 


34 

La  iu»t  a  fluctuating  quantity,  but  is  steadily  Increasing  or  decreasing, 
while  the  flow  of  the  streams  is  fluctuating,  often  violently,  during 
these  months.  Also,  \\  bile  the  average  demand,  in  June  for  example, 
i-  for  L,000  cubic  feel  per  second,  the  greater  part  of  the  demand  is  in 
the  latter  part  of  the  month.  The  greater  pari  of  the  storage  is  done 
therefore  early  in  June.  In  July  the  storing  is  done  during  the  peri- 
odical rises  only,  while  during  the  winter  months  the  loss  of  what 
might  be  stored  (see  sixth  column  of  table)  is  occasioned  largely  by 
the  freezing  of  the  ditches,  and  for  that  reason  in  estimating  the  addi- 
tional amount  that  might  be  stored,  about  one-third  is  deducted  from 
the  total  loss  at  present.  A  little  care  would  almost  always  permit 
the  entire  amount  in  the  river  to  be  stored.  The  last  column  is  an 
exhibition  of  when  the  additional  water  so  stored  would  be  used. 
according  to  those  best  informed  on  the  matter.  It  is  agreed  that  at 
present  the  early  water  is  forcing  the  planting  of  early  maturing  crops, 
though  these  are  not  as  profitable  as  the  later  ones. 

Development  in  reservoirs  is  not  restricted  to  the  water  now  going 
to  waste,  for  it  will  he  profitable  to  store  the  water  which  even  now  is 
being  used  for  direct  irrigation  and  save  it  for  the  more  profitable  late 
products.  With  potatoes  producing  an  average  of  *l<>n  annually  per 
acre,  and  beets  two-thirds  that  amount,  neither  using  much  more  water 
in  a  season  than  is  necessary  for  a  $20  alfalfa  or  wheat  crop,  the  build- 
ing of  what  we  might  call  iretarding  or  temporary  storage  reservoirs 
can  not  he  other  than  profitable.  To  the  construction  of  retarding 
reservoirs  the  demand  for  direct  irrigation  acts  as  a  check,  and  the 
true  status  of  the  right  of  such  reservoirs  to  store  water  is  yet  to  be 
determined.  In  some  districts  it  is  the  custom  to  allow  temporary 
storage  of  water  taken  from  the  river  on  a  " direct  irrigation "  pri- 
ority; in  others  it  is  looked  upon  as  illegal.  One  side  argues  that  water 
alike  in  quantity  and  time  would  be  taken  from  the  common  source  in 
any  case,  and  that  it  makes  no  difference  to  later  ditches  whether  it  is 
actually  applied  at  once  or  after  a  short  interval.  The  other  side  con- 
tends that  only  when  not  needed  for  immediate  use  may  it  be  stored, 
and  that  the  storing  will  increase  the  area  irrigated  and  the  consequent 
withdrawal  of  a  larger  total  amount  during  the  season.  There  can  be 
no  question  as  to  which  would  be  for  the  greater  good  of  the  community 
as  a  whole,  but  the  established  rights  of  individuals  must  be  respected. 

Returning  again  to  the  diagram  and  table,  we  tind  that  237  cubic 
feet  per  second  represents  the  average  discharge  for  the  year,  or  about 
171,729  acre-feet:  that  100,271  acre-feet  are  used  for  direct  irrigation: 
about  43,000  acre-feet  are  stored:  about  18,000  acre-feet  escape,  and 
it  is  possible  to  store  a  little  over  12,000  acre-feet  more  than  is  stored 
at  present. 

It  appears  that  during  April.  May,  and  June  equal  amounts  of  water 
are  stored.  The  commissioners  differ  somewhat  as  to  this,  but  incline 
to  the  belief  that  more  is  stored  in  June.     A   necessary  correction. 


U.  S.  Dept.  of  Age,  Bui.  118,  Office  of  Expt.  Stations.     Irrigation  Investigations. 


Plate  III. 


85 

however,  which  they  hare  not  considered  is  the  amount  of  water 
which  is  stored  in  fact,  but  is  supposed  to  be  diverted  for  direct  use. 
The  private  reservoirs  especially  practice  storing  their  pro  rata  of 

ditch  water  when  they  do  not  need  it  for  direct  use.  Man\  system- 
atically store  water  at  nights  and  on  Sundays,  and  in  the  aggregate 
this  is  no  inconsiderable  amount.  The  practice  is  indulged  in  very 
early  in  the  season,  as  the  reservoirs  are  empty  and  a  general  fear 
exists  that  they  may  not  be  entirely  filled;  later,  when  many  of  the 
reservoirs  are  full,  this  practice  stops.  For  this  reason  the  quantity 
stored  during  April  and  May  is  made  larger  than  would  at  first  thought 
seem  proper. 

On  the  diagram  will  be  noted  small  circles  scattered  over  the  por- 
tion representing  the  months  of  May,  June,  July,  and  August.  These, 
with  the  year   indicated,  represent  the  highest  water  for  these  years. 

In  the  following  descriptions  of  reservoirs  those  under  each  ditch 
are  given  together  to  enable  one  to  form  an  estimate  of  the  value  of 
the  reservoir  and  ditch  as  a  system.  The  list  contains  many  reservoirs 
of  little  importance,  and  these  are  inserted  more  with  a  view  to  mak- 
ing- the  list  complete  than  to  their  value. 

RESERVOIRS  UNDER  THE  LOVELAND  AND  GREELEY  CANAL. 

LAKE    LOVELAND. 

This  is  the  largest  lake  in  the  district,  and  one  of  the  most  noted  in 
the  State,  not  only  for  its  size  and  capacity,  but  for  the  amount  of 
land  dependent  upon  it  for  water.  The  land  irrigated  has  generall}T  a 
ditch  right,  as  well  as  reservoir  right,  reserving  the  latter  until  late  in 
the  season. 

The  reservoir  covers  -±72  acres,  and  is  located  near  the  north  bound- 
ary of  the  town  of  Loveland.  It  is  a  natural  depression  which  was 
enlarged  and  improved  by  the  building  of  a  dike  along  the  south  side, 
18  feet  high,  20  feet  wide  on  top,  with  a  slope  of  3  to  1  on  the  inner 
face  and  1£  to  1  on  the  outer  face;  the  inner  face  is  well  riprapped 
with  stone.  A  tunnel,  lined  with  concrete,  three-fourths  of  a  mile 
long  and  5  feet  in  diameter,  furnishes  ample  outlet  facilities  and  dis- 
charges into  the  Loveland  and  Greeley  Canal.  A  brick  tower  near 
the  south  side  of  the  lake  at  the  upper  end  of  the  tunnel  contains 
the  mechanism  for  opening  and  closing  the  gates  (PL  III).  The  gate- 
are  of  iron  sliding  in  grooves  outside  the  tower  and  operated  by  a 
threaded  rod.  worm  gear,  and  wheel.  The  amount  discharged  through 
the  tunnel  seldom  exceeds  350  cubic  feet  per  second.  The  inlet  ditch, 
known  as  the  Old  Barnes  Ditch,  has  its  head  gate  3^  miles  above  the 
reservoir,  and  a  capacity  of  more  than  400  cubic  feet  per  second,  though 
on  account  of  the  danger  of  breaking  where  it  runs  along  a  side  hill, 
275  cubic  feet  per  second  is  about  the  maximum  carried. 


36 

The  reservoir  has  ;i  maximum  available  capacity  of  1.3,000  acre-feet 
and  an  unavailable  capacity  of  7,000  acre-feet.  At  the  various  depths 
it  lias  the  following  capacities: 

( 'opacity  of  Lake  Loveland. 


Feet. 

Acre- 
feet. 

0 

-.7.  (Mill 

5 

1. Ill  III 

in 

2.00U 

15 

3,300 

20 

l.7i  hi 

6,300 

30 

8,000 

9,900 

Hi 

13,000 

a  Unavailable. 


The  cost  of  the  construction  of  the  reservoir  was  about  $125,000, 
and  the  present  cash  value  of  each  of  the  300  shares  is  $750.  One 
hundred  and  thirty-five  shares  were  sold  some  years  ago,  1<><>  being 
taken  on  a  guaranty  before  the  work  of  construction  was  beerun,  and 
35  -old  at  irregular  intervals  during  the  seven  years  since  the  reser- 
voir has  been  in  operation.  During  the  present  year  some  4-0  shares 
were  sold,  more  than  during  the  entire  time  previously,  and  at  the 
full  cash  value.  A  sudden  awakening  seems  to  have  come  as  to  the 
value  of  reservoirs  for  late  water,  due  in  a  measure  to  the  advent  of 
the  sugar  beet.  It  is  probable  that  the  remainder  of  the  300  rights 
will  be  disposed  of  before  many  years,  and  at  an  advanced  price. 

In  delivering  water  from  tin1  reservoir  the  wishes  of  a  majority  of 
the  farmers  have  been  considered  in  determining  the  time  when  the 
water  is  to  be  run.  The  difference  in  location  and  a  considerable 
difference  in  the  crops  raised  on  the  upper  and  lower  parts  of  the 
ditch  often  caused  a  conflict  between  these  two  sections  on  this  point. 
The  lower  ditch,  having  a  considerable  majority,  generally  had  its 
way.  It  is  proposed,  however,  hereafter,  so  far  as  is  practicable,  to 
consider  the  needs  of  each  farm  and  to  divide  the  ditch  into  at  least 
two  sections.  A  now  of  1.44  cubic  feet  per  second  is  accounted  the 
equivalent  of  an  80-acre  water  right,  and  that  amount  is  turned  out 
for  each  right,  measured  over  a  weir,  the  total  amount  being  measured 
in  a  rating  flume  near  the  mouth  of  the  tunnel.  h\  the  description  of 
the  Loveland  and  Greeley  Canal  it  is  stated  that  more  than  21,000  acres 
were  actually  irrigated  by  it.  It  is  interesting  to  know  that  after  the 
1st  of  July  practically  no  water  direct  from  the  river  is  used  on 
17,000  acres  of  this  land,  the  other  4,000  being  served  by  the  old  free 
rights.  Much  of  this  4,000  acres  possesses  reservoir  rights  also. 
There  are  in  use  175  shares  of  reservoir  rights  of  80  acres  each,  or  in 
all  14,000  acres. 


37 

»   During  the  year  L901  the  following  runs  were  bad  from  the  lake  on 

this  land: 

Runs  of water  from  Lah   Fx>veland}  1901. 


Date. 


July  21  to  July  27 

Augusl  2  to  August  7 

August  1  I  to  A.UgUfi1   19 

August  26  i"  September  l  . . . 
September  c>  t<>  September  13 

Total 


Cubic  feet. 


feet. 


6       91,806,000 

78,  - 
5       69,200,000 

84,034,000 
•  021,000 


2,108 
1,809 

1 .  929 
1,814 


28      102 


9,249 


At  the  end  of  the  season  there  remained  9.5  feet  in  the  lake  to  be 
drawn  off,  about  2,000  acre-feet.  Without  counting  loss,  which  is 
probably  made  up  by  seepage  into  the  ditch,  the  reservoir  furnished 
practically  a  depth  of  *  inches  over  all  the  land  possessing  reservoir 
rights. 

The  amount  of  water  run  into  the  ditch,  as  nearly  as  can  be  deter- 
mined, was,  prior  to  April  30,  2,91  £  acre-feet;  in  May.  5,139  acre-feet; 
in  June.  ir>. '.mm)  acre-feet;  in  July.  7,068  acre-feet;  in  August,  L,916 
acre-feet:  in  September,  870acre-feet — a  total  of  38,946 acre-feet;  but 
this  water  was  subject  to  the  demand  of  nearly  the  entire  21,000  acres, 
making  a  depth  of  1.85  feet. 

THE    BIG    CUT    RESERVOIR. 

This  reservoir  is  located  in  sec.  6,  T.  5  X..  R.  67  W.,  covers  76  acres, 
and  contains  1 ,150  acre-feet  of  water  when  tilled  to  its  full  capacity. 
It  is  filled  from  the  Loveland  and  Greeley  Canal  during  high  water. 

DARROUGH    LAKE. 

This  is  situated  in  sees,  -rand  9,  T.  5  N.,  R.  68  \Y\.  has  a  capacity  of 
400  acre-feet,  and  is  about  60  acres  in  area.  It  is  supplied  with  water 
from  the  Loveland  and  Greeley  Canal. 


THE    SANBORN    RESERVOIRS    NOS.    1    AND    2. 

These  reservoirs  are  owned  by  private  individuals.  Together  they 
are  supposed  to  contain  -J-oo  acre-feet,  but  have  not  been  used  to  any 
considerable  extent.  They  can  be  tilled  from  tin1  Loveland  and  Greeley 
Canal  and  gather  some  seepage  water.  They  were  intended  to  supply 
domestic  water  in  the  immediate  vicinity  of  Greeley  by  means  of  a 
pipe  line  run  from  them. 

The  reservoir  sites  under  the  Loveland  and  Greeley  Canal  are  few, 
viz.  the  Dawkins,  in  sees.  21  and  28,  T.  5  X..  R.  67  W.;  the  Basch, 
capacity  25  acre-feet,  in  sec.  10,  T.  5  X..  R.  68  W.;  the  Steele,  with 
an  area  of  7  acres  and  a  capacity  of  25  acre-feet,  and  the  Steele  and 


38 

Phillips,  in  sec  16,  T.  5  X..  EL  66  W.,  macros  in  area  and  having  a 
capacity  of  35  acre-feet.  These  are  unimportant  in  point  of  capacity 
and  can  be  used  only  for  very  limited  areas. 

RESERVOIRS  UNDER  THE  LOUDON  DITCH. 

Under  the  Loudon  Ditch  there  are  several  small  reservoirs  and  some 
very  fine  reservoir  sites;  the  main  difficulty  met  with,  however,  is  the 
distance  of  the  better  sites  from  the  head  urates  of  the  supply  canals. 
The  reservoir  sites  are  natural  depressions  without  outlet-  and  conse- 
quently tunnels  or  cuts  must  be  made  through  which  to  draw  the 
water.  On  account  of  the  loss  of  head  and  the  location  of  the  basins 
below  the  head  gates  of  the  ditches  of  the  district  an  exchange  of  water 
from  them  with  other  ditches  is  difficult.  If  discharged  into  the  river 
there  would  he  no  ditches  below  to  take  tin1  water  and  use  it.  as  the 
Mariano  Lake  now  exchanges  with  tin'  lower  ditches  to  almost  their 
full  rights. 

BENSON    LAKE. 

Benson  Lake  is  situated  in  the  X.  i  of  sec.  10,  T.  :>  X..  R.  69  W. 
It  is  owned  by  A.  S.  Benson,  of  Loveland.  and  used  by  him  to  sup- 
plement his  supply  from  the  Barnes  Ditch  for  about  -!<»<>  acres  of  land. 
By  the  use  of  the  reservoir  Mr.  Benson  says  the  amount  of  land  irri- 
gated is  twice  what  it  otherwise  would  be.  The  reservoir  has  an 
available  capacity  of  about  300  acre-feet. 

THE    RENTAL. 

This  is  a  small  lake  of  about  1<»  acres  in  sec.  2.  T.  5  N.,  R.  69  W.\ 
tilled  from  the  Loudon  Ditch  and  supplements  the  irrigation  of  some 
60  acres.     The  capacity  is  about  50  acre-feet. 

SEVEN    LAKES.    LOUDON  AND    BOYD    LAKES. 

These  form  a  system  lying  close  together  some  3  miles  northeast  of 
Loveland.  and  for  the  most  efficient  use  are  largely  dependent  on  each 
other.  The  Loudon  Lake,  which  is  the  most  northerly,  has  been  in 
operation  for  some  time,  and  by  decree  has  aright  to50;000,000  cubic 
feet,  or  1.148  acre-feet.  Its  priority  is  dated  February  24.  1883,  and 
is  the  sixth  on  the  Bio-  Thompson  River.  This  lake  is  located  mainly 
in  sec.  30,  T.  6  X..  R.  68  W.,  on  the  line  of  the  Loudon  lateral,  and  is 
used  as  an  auxiliary  supply  for  some  2,000  acres  of  land  on  the  Cache 
la  Poudre  slope.  It  covers  about  65  acres  to  a  depth  of  28  feet.  The 
area  of  land  irrigated  by  the  Loudon  lateral  by  reason  of  the  avail- 
ability of  the  water  from  this  reservoir  is  at  least  doubled.  The  reser- 
voir, with  its  outlet  ditch,  was  bought  by  the  Seven  Lakes  Company. 
The  vear  1901  was  the  first  season  for  the  Seven  Lakes  and  was  fairlv 


39 

satisfactory .  What  its  future  usefulness  will  be  has  not  yet  been 
determined,  the  first  season  developing  a  number  of  unforseen  diffi- 
culties and  conflicting  legal  claims. 

The  reservoirs  are  supplied  partly  by  seepage  and  waste  water,  but 
tins  source,  even  augmented  by  flood  water-,  which  are  not  inconsid- 
erable, is  entirely  insufficient.  Dependence  must  be  placed,  therefore, 
on  a  supply  from  the  Loudon  Hitch,  and  -0»  shares  in  thai  ditch  were 
purchased,  the  intention  being  to  till  all  the  reservoirs  through  the 
Loudon  Reservoir  with  water  furnished  to  these  shares.  As  water 
can  not  legally  he  stored  when  needed  for  direct  irrigation  an  injunc- 
tion immediately  stopped  the  practice  and  the  question  will  be  Anally 

settled  in  the  courts. 

In  addition  to  this  difficulty  the  Loudon  Ditch  Company  does  not 
feel  hound  to  allow  the  use  of  the  canal  as  a  supply  ditch  for  the  Seven 
Lakes,  at  least  not  without  compensation. 

The  Seven  Lakes  Company  contracted  with  the  Loveland  and 
Greeley  Ditch  to  carry  56  cubic  feet  of  water  per  second  to  lands  under 
that  ditch.  On  account  of  the  smallness  of  the  outlet  and  the  small 
difference  in  level  between  the  lakes  and  the  ditch,  not  more  than  40 
cubic  feet  per  second  could  be  discharged  into  the  Loveland  and 
Greeley  ('anal,  and  when  the  water  in  the  reservoir  had  been  lowered, 
20  cubic  feet  per  second  was  the  most  that  could  be  drawn.  Some 
difficulties  in  dividing  the  water  of  the  reservoir  and  of  the  ditch 
developed,  but  these  can  probably  be  (nisi ly  overcome  as  the  conditions 
are  better  known. 

With  ample  supply  facilities,  the  capacity  of  the  reservoirs  could  be 
increased  by  additional  embankments  130,000,000  cubic  feet,  and  by 
drawing  off  the  low  water  in  reservoirs  Nos.  1.  2.  and  3  into  Boyd  Lake 
100,ooo,O(M>  cubic  feet  of  now  unavailable  water  could  be  used.  This, 
with  the  330,000,000  cubic  feet  capacity  at  present,  would  make 
560,000,000  cubic  feet,  or  12,856  acre-feet— almost  equal  to  Lake  Love- 
land. Most  of  this  water  would  be  used  on  the  Cache  la  Poudre  slope 
or  at  the  lower  end  of  this  district. 

Boyd  Lake  and  South  Lake,  natural  bodies  of  water  separated  by  a 
low  ridge,  have  been  examined  and  reported  on  by  Captain  Chitten- 
den, U.  S.  Army".  It  is  one  of  the  best  sites  in  the  State.  The  plan 
outlined  by  Captain  Chittenden  is  for  the  development  of  the  greatest 
capacity  of  the  lake.  However,  by  filling  the  lake  and  sluicing  out 
the  cut  to  a  less  depth  than  was  contemplated,  the  cost  would  be  vastly 
less  than  the  estimated  cost  under  the  Chittenden  plan,  and  yet  would 
be  ample  to  store  the  available  water. 

Two  small  reservoirs  exist  in  sec.  2,  T.  5  X..  R.  69  W..  and  cover 
some  10  acres  each.  Their  combined  capacity  is  perhaps  100  acre-feet, 
and  they  are  used  as  an  auxiliary  supply  on  the  lands  of  the  owners. 


a  House  Doc.  141,  55th  Cong.,  2d  session. 


40 

The  reservoir  sites  under  the  Loudon  Ditch  are  comparatively  .small 
and  few  in  number,  aside  from  the  Seven  Lakes  and  Boyd  system. 

There  is  a  site  belonging  to  A.  S.  Benson  in  the  8.  i  of  sec.  10,  T. 
5  N.,  11.  69  \\\.  and  one  belonging  to  A.  S.  Benson  and  A.  Rist  in  see. 
9,  T.  5  N.,  R.  69  VY .  These  have  an  area  of  50  acres  each  and  could 
possibly  be  made  to  have  L5  feet  of  available  depth. 

George  W.  Alford  has  a  site  in  the  NE.  i  of  sec.  2,  T.  5  N.,  R.  69 
\\\.  possibly  20  acres  in  area  and  lo  feet  available  depth. 

The  Fairport  Lake,  in  sec.  13,  T.  6  N.,  K.  69  W.,  is  on  the  Cache  la 
Poudre  slope,  connected  with  the  Cache  la  Poudre  by  an  inlet  canal. 
It  has  an  area  of  53  acres  and  a  capacity  of  575  acre-feet.  It  con- 
tributes to  the  irrigation  of  some  L,500  acres. 

RESERVOIRS   UNDER   THE    HANDY   DITCH. 

Under  the  Handy  Ditch  there  are.  as  previously  stated,  only  private 
reservoirs,  although  the  company  will  probably  very  soon  take  steps 
to  obtain  suitable  reservoir  facilities. 

FRANK  LOVELAND  RESERVOIR. 

This  reservoir  is  located  in  the  NE.  i  of  sec.  15,  T.  4  N.,  R.  69  W., 
and  covers  nearly  the  entire  quarter  section.  It  has  a  capacity  of  800 
acre-feet,  which,  however,  can  be  greatly  increased.  By  the  raising 
of  the  dike  some  10  feet  a  capacity  of  2,000  acre-feet  could  be 
obtained.  As  the  reservoir  has  recently  changed  hands,  it  is  probable 
that  this  will  be  done.     At  present  it  is  not  much  used  for  irrigation. 

THE    DE    FRANCE    RESERVOIR. 

This  reservoir  is  located  in  sees.  4,  5,  8,  and  9,  T.  4  N.,  R.  68  W., 
and  covers  over  50  acres.  It  is  used  in  irrigating  some  (loo  acres  of 
land  and  has  a  capacity  of  250  acre-feet.  It  is  most  efficient  in  sup- 
plying late  water. 

THE    KEE    RESERVOIR. 

The  Kee  Reservoir  is  located  in  the  NE.  J  sec.  17.  T.  4  N.,  R.  69  W., 
and  is  tilled  through  the  Handy  Ditch  in  the  spring.  It  is  a  natural 
basin,  with  a  dam  some  12  feet  high,  and  irrigates  about  50  acres. 
Its  capacity  is  not  over  loo  acre  feet. 

THE    BROWN    RESERVOIR. 

The  Brown  Reservoir  is  located  in  the  SW.  i  sec.  35,  T.  5  N.,  R.  69 
\\\.  receives  its  supply  from  the  Handy  Ditch,  and  being  just  above 
the  Home  Supply  Ditch,  exchanges  water  with  it.  It  has  a  capacity  of 
65  acre-feet  and  irrigates  souk1  to  acres  of  land. 


41 


TTTK    WILSON    RESERVOIR. 


This  reservoir  is  located  in  the  SW.  |  sec.  20,  T.  4  N..  K.  69  W., 
is  filled  from  the  Handy  Hitch,  irrigates  LOO  acres,  has  an  area  of  30 
aero,  ami  a  capacity  of  probably  L50  acre-feet.  It  is  proposed  to 
enlarge  this  reservoir  soon. 


THE    HUPl'   LAKH    RESERVOIR. 

This  reservoir  is  in  the  NW.  |  sec.  35,  T.  5  S.,  R.  69  W..  is  filled 

from  the  Handy  Hitch,  furnishes  late  water   for    L60  acres,  and   has  a 
capacity  of  50  acre-feet,  which  could  be  doubled  by  building  a  high 

dam. 

THE    HUPP    RESERVOIR. 

This  reservoir  is  located  in  sec  28.  T.  4:  N.,  R.  69  W.,  has  been 
practically  abandoned,  though  it  contains  water  from  seepage.  It  was 
found  to  injure  the  land  below  it,  while  available  to  irrigate  little  land. 
The  capacity  was  50  acre-feet. 

THE    BERTHOUD   TOWN   LAKE. 

This  lake  is  used  for  irrigation  in  the  town  of  Berthoud,  is  small 
and  irrigates  little  land. 

THE    JANSEN    RESERVOIR. 

The  Jansen  Reservoir  is  located  in  sec.  13,  T.  4N„  R.  69  W. ;  covers 
40  acres;  it  is  supplied  now  from  waste  and  seepage  water;  is  unused 
at  present,  but  could  be  developed  to  cover  100  acres,  with  a  capacity 
of  1,000  acre-feet. 

THE    HUMMEL    LAKE. 

This  lake  is  in  sec.  IT,  T.  1  N.,  R.  6$  W.,  is  owned  by  J.  C.  Hum- 
mel and  is  used  to  irrigate  the  owner's  land,  some  350  acres.  It  cov- 
ers an  area  of  60  acres  and  has  a  capacity  of  250  acre-feet.  It  is  tilled 
through  the  Handy  Ditch  in  the  spring. 

BEASLEY    LAKE. 

Beasley  Lake  is  in  sec.  11,  T.  1  N.,  R.  69  W.,  filled  by  the  Handy 
ditch,  is  owned  by  the  Loveland  Lake  and  Ditch  Company.  It  covers 
L55  acres  and  can  be  drawn  off  for  a  depth  of  li»  feet  or  about  1,800 
acre-feet.  It  furnishes  water  to  some  2,000  acre-,  largely  potato  and 
sugar-beet  land.     It  cost  $14,000  to  construct,  and  is  valued  at  $50,000. 

THE    AVELCH    RESERVOIRS. 

These  are  five  in  number  and  probably  the  most  important  under  the 
Handy  Ditch,  especially  if  developed  and  used  to  their  full  capacity. 
The  two  more  northerly  reservoirs,  Nos.  3  and  1.  are  not  used  at  pres- 
ent.    The  capacity  of  the  five  is  4,400  acre-feet.     No.  1.  the  largest, 


42 

covers  L27  acres,  and  has  a  claimed  capacity  of  2,500  acre-feet.  Nos. 
2  and  5  have  a  combined  capacity  of  H5  acre-feet.  The  reservoirs  at 
present  serve  about  800  acres. 

THE   CHAPMAN    RESERVOIR. 

The  Chapman  Reservoir  covers  about  70  acres  in  sec.  32,  T.  5  N., 
lv.  69  W.,  and  irrigates  probably  not  more  than  80  acres.     Another 

smaller  reservoir  in  the  same  section  is  used  for  stock  purposes  prin- 
cipally. 

Some  other  sites  and  reservoirs  exist  under  the  Handy  Ditch,  but 
little  could  be  learned  concerning  them.  The  Smith  and  Welty  Lake, 
in  sec.  15,  T.  4  N.j  K.  68  W.,  has  an  area  of  25  acres  and  a  capacity  of 
loo  acre-feet.  The  Berthoud  Lake,  in  sec.  11,  T.  4  N.,  R.  on  W.,  has 
an  area  of  -±o  acres  and  a  capacity  of  250  acre-feet.  The  Welch  Lake, 
in  sec.  25,  T.  5  N..  R.  69  W.,  has  an  area  of  30  acres  and  a  capacity  of 
200  acre-feet.  In  sees.  IT.  20,  and  21,  T.  4  X..  R.  69  W.,  are  some 
very  fair  reservoir  sites.  Mr.  George  Zwick  owns  a  good  site  in  sees. 
17  and  20,  T.  4  N..,  R.  To  W.  W.  T.  Newell  has  a  site  in  sec.  18,  T. 
&  N..  R.  68  W..  with  an  area  of  about  150  acres.  It  could  be  tilled 
from  the  Handy  Ditch  and  furnish  probably  1,500  acre-feet  of  water. 

In  the  tilling-  of  reservoirs  under  the  Handy  Ditch  the  stockholders 
are  permitted  to  store  water  in  proportion  to  the  amount  of  their 
stock,  if  they  prefer  to  do  so.  As  between  themselves,  the  water  is 
always  divided  in  proportion  to  the  stock  held  by  each,  and  no  restric- 
tions are  placed  on  the  u9e  to  which  it  is  put.  On  account  of  the 
smallness  of  its  first  priority  and  the  necessary  abundance  of  water  in 
the  river  before  the  ditch  can  draw  on  its  second  priority,  it  is  not 
possible  to  store  water  "  needed  by  other  ditches  for  direct  irrigation." 
Whenever  the  ditch  is  running  50  cubic  feet  per  second  or  less  it  is 
probable  that  every  user  needs  his  full  amount  for  direct  irrigation. 

RESERVOIRS  UNDER  THE  HOME  SUPPLY  CANAL. 

The  reservoirs  under  the  Home  Supply  Canal  are  both  large  and 
important,  and  the  values  of  the  water  rights  and  of  the  land  equal  the 
oldest  rights  on  the  river. 

It  is  estimated  by  those  best  acquainted  with  the  practical  working 
of  the  Home  Supply  system  that  at  least  three  times  the  area  is  now 
irrigated  that  could  be  served  without  the  Mariano  and  Lone  Tree 
lakes;  that  i>  to  say.  L8,000  acres  are  now  irrigated  in  place  of  the 
(),000  possible  with  the  ditch  alone.  The  land  is  estimated  to  be  worth 
two-fifths  more  with  than  without  reservoir  rights:  its  value  under  this 
system  being  from  *4o  to  $60  per  acre. 

Under  this  system  water  is  sometimes  rented  to  others  than  stock- 
holders, the  price  being  $12.50,  equal  to  $1.25  per  acre  per  year, 
which,  considering  the  certainty  of  supply  and  the  ability  to  use  it  at 
any  time,  is  very  reasonable. 


The  division  of  water  is  somewhat  unique.  As  long  as  there  is  a 
supply  in  the  ditch  and  the  reservoirs  are  not  taking  it  for  storage,  the 
stockholders  have  what  is  called  "free"  water,  and  do  account  of  its 
ose  or  distribution  is  kept;  hut  when  the  reservoirs  begin  to  supply 
the  demand  a  conservative  estimate  is  made  of  the  amount  of  water  in 
the  lakes  available  for  use,  and  this  amount  is  divided  equally  among 
tin1  2,001  shares,  and  each  stockholder  is  credited  with  his  amount  in 
cubic  feet.  An  accurate  account  is  kept  of  the  amount  each  stock- 
holder draws,  and  thi>  is  charged  to  him.  lie  is  permitted  to  draw 
the  full  amount  as  soon  as  he  pleases.  When  the  estimated  amount 
has  been  drawn  off,  if  there  is  water  in  the  lake  another  credit  is  made 
as  before,  and  the  additional  amount  can  then  he  demanded.  By  this 
system  economy  is  encouraged,  a  high  duty  is  obtained,  and  the  easy 
rotation  of  crops  and  the  planting  of  whatever  seems  best  are  made 
possible.     It  eliminates  also  many  causes  of  controversy. 

In  acquiring  its  reservoirs  the  Consolidated  Home  Supply  Company 
purchased  in  1881,  with  $6,000  worth  of  its  stock,  the  Lone  Tree  site. 
The  company  expended  $12,000  on  its  dam  and  $10,000  on  its  tunnel 
and  outlets.  (PI.  IV.)  It  has  a  priority  dated  August  31,  1881,  for 
400,000,000  cubic  feet.  To  acquire  the  Mariano  Lake  the  company 
paid  $6,000  for  the  land  and  right  of  way  through  the  Rist  Ditch, 
agreeing  to  enlarge  and  maintain  it  for  its  use.  It  expended  £4,000 
on  the  dam  and  outlet.  (PI.  V.)  The  lake  has  a  priority  dated  Octo- 
ber 1,  1875,  amounting  to  180,865,000  cubic  feet.  With  riprapping 
and  other  expenses,  the  cost  of  both  reservoirs  was  certainly  not  over 
$50,000;  this  expenditure  has  increased  values  of  shares  probably  *1<hi 
each,  a  total  of  $200,100,  and  has  increased  the  value  of  the  18,000 
acres  irrigated  probably  $20  per  acre,  or  $360,000 — all  of  which  goes 
to  show  the  value  of  reservoir  water. 

In  1901  the  distribution  of  water  from  the  reservoirs  began  on  June 
1;  a  number  of  days  of  ;;free"  water  intervened,  but  from  that  time 
to  the  end  of  the  season  water  was  run  continuously  from  one  or  both 
of  the  reservoirs.  It  was  stated  by  the  secretary  that  as  much  reser- 
voir water  was  used  in  September  as  in  June,  and  that  the  tendency 
for  a  number  of  years  has  been  to  use  the  water  later  each  year.  He 
also  stated  that  the  expenses  of  repair,  maintenance,  and  distribution 
would  not  exceed  S2, 000  per  year,  or  about  11  cents  per  acre  irrigated, 
and  with  the  value  of  rights  at  $150.  allowing  6  per  cent  interest,  the 
total  cost  per  year  per  acre  would  amount  to  about  $1. 

The  Mariano  Lake  discharges  its  water  into  the  river,  the  discharge 
being  limited  by  the  amount  to  which  the  ditches  below  are  at  the 
time  entitled  by  their  priorities.  The  ditch  takes  from  the  river 
above  a  like  amount,  thus  enabling  its  owners  to  use  the  water  in  the 
regular  way.  and  the  effect  is  the  same  as  though  the  reservoir  were 
at  the  head  of  and  above  the  ditch.     The  capacity  of  Mariano  Lake  is 


44 


probably  dow equal  to  ite  decreed  priority,  but  it  could  ho  enlarged  to 
hold  at  leasl  one-third  more  than  that  amount.  The  Lone  Tree  Lake 
has  a  capacity  of  nearly  twice  that  of  the  Mariano  Lake.  Being  high 
enough  to  irrigate  most  of  the  lands  under  the  ditch,  it  does  not 
exchange  water  with  the  river.  Such  lands  as  lie  above  it  are  sup- 
plied by  that  taken  in  exchange  for  the  Mariano  Lake  water. 

The  following  lesser  reservoirs  are  also  under  or  supplied  by  the 
I  Ionic  Supply  Ditch: 

The  Rist  Reservoir,  supplied  like  Mariano  Lake,  from  the  Rist  Ditch. 
covers  some  40  acres,  and  is  used  to  irrigate  the  lands  of  the  Buck- 
ingham estate,  to  which  it  belongs.     It  has  a  capacity  of  1 L5  acre-feet. 

The  Big  Hollow  Reservoir,  a  seepage  reservoir  in  sec.  27,  T.  5  N.. 
lv.  68  W..  has  a  capacity  of  30  acre-feet. 

The  Allen  Reservoir,  6  acres  in  area,  in  sec.  6,  T.  4  N.,  R.  07  W.,  is 
also  a  seepage  reservoir,  with  a  capacity  of  about  85  acre-feet,  which 
may  be  increased. 

The  White-Butler  Reservoir,  on  the  south  side  of  the  Little  Thomp- 
son, has  purchased  rights  from  the  Home  Supply  Ditch,  Imt  it  is  not 
properly  in  the  Big  Thompson  district. 

There  is  also  one  other  reservoir  on  the  south  side  of  the  Little 
Thompson,  but  it  is  supplied  by  the  Hillsboro  Ditch:  name  unknown. 
It  has  an  area  of  160  acres  and  has  a  capacity  of  1.500  acre-feet. 


DUTY  OF  WATER. 

The  data  at  hand  scarcely  justifies  discussing  at  any  great  length 
the  duty  of  water.  To  reach  results  of  value  would  require  an  exami- 
nation and  classification  of  the  soil  under  each  ditch,  the  kind  of  crops 
raised,  and  measurement  of  the  water  used  by  each  over  a  series  of 
years.  The  following  table  gives,  however,  such  data  as  has  been 
collected: 

Duty  of  water  on  Big  Thompson  River^  1901. 


ruder     Irriga- 

ditCh.          Ted. 

Water  diverted. 

Name  of  ditch. 

January 

1  to 

April  30. 

May. 

June. 

July. 

August 

Septem- 
ber. 

Big  Thompson  and  Manu- 
facturing Co 

Acres.      Acres. 

2,000         1,300 

4,500        3.000 

30,000       21,000 

1.800  j      1,500 

2,000         1,800 
13,000       10,000 

9,000        5,000 
15,000       12,500 

2,000        2,000 
19,000       18, 1 

3,000            640 

1,000            800 
500            300 

1,000             '.mh> 

Acre-ft. 

Acre-ft. 

360 

10,278 

1 ,  544 
3,000 

2,  962 
4,466 
C».  000 

666 

6, 430 

300 

Acre-ft. 

70S 
2.410 
15,900 

3,080 

3,  11^ 
5,706 

7,832 

842 

5,058 

300 

Acre-ft. 

1,086 
1,338 
7,068 

1 .  836 
1,180 
1,504 
3,  950 
2,612 

924 
:;.  172 

300 

Acre-ft. 

504 

1,916 

1,043 

212 
J  .770 
1 .  938 
1,660 
626 
3,052 
300 

Acre-ft. 

242 

Farmers' 

40 

Loveland  and  Greeley 

Big  Thompson  and   Platte 
River 

2,914 

300 

2, 000 
1,938 

870 

90S 

George  Rial 

90 

London  

390 

Hillsboro 

1,220 
640 

Handy 

3,000 

South  Side  .   . 

180 

Home  Supply 

3.000 

1,070 

Big  Thompson 

300 

Big  Thompson  Irrigating ... 
Risl  and  Goes 

300 
500 

600 

400 

700 

Hill  and  Brush 

Total 

103,800        78,740        18.159        87.1fifi        51   088        29  37(1        18.857 

5,  950 

U.  S.  Dept.  of  Agr.,  Bui.  1 18,  Office  of  Expt.  Stations.     Irrigation  Investigations. 


Plate  IV, 


Fig.  1.— Outlet  of  Lone  Tree  Reservoir. 


» 

:* 

.--    • 

t         "m        ■_      iHI ! 

K    .  •  §.*'•  ^2*^3^"/' 

^3  nORkra^v. 

mi 

Fig.  2.— Weir  just  Below  Outlet  of  Lone  Tree  Reservoir. 


U.  S.  Dopt.  of  Agr.,  Bui.  1 18,  Offico  of  Expt.  Stations.     Irri  \  ition  Investigations. 


Plate  V. 


Fig.  1.— Mariano  Reservoir. 


Fig.  2.— Dam  of  Mariano  Reservoir. 


45 


Duty  oj  watei  on  Big  Thompson  River,  1901    Continued. 


Total 

amount 

used. 

Amount  used 

Depth 
mi  laud. 

Feet. 

2.  50 
1. 55 
1 .  85 

.-...Mi 
1.7:; 
3.30 
1.71 
1.  (>•_' 
1 .  58 
2.34 

Duty  of 

1  ciil.ii- 
fool  per 
second 
for  Mi 
days. 

diverl 
ed,  L«0 

a  parity 

Name  of  ditch. 

Direct. 

Prom 
voir. 

voire 
under 

ditch. 

Big  Thompson  and   Manufacturing 
Co        

Acre-ft. 

3,232 

1,652 

38,946 

8,711 

3,600 

17,270 

16,  168 

21,744 

3,238 

28,382 

1,500 

Acre-ft. 

8,232 
1,652 

25,946 
8,711 
3,600 
9,27(1 

L4.958 

Ki.711 
3,238 

1  1,382 
1,500 

Acres. 

l  13 

193 

(12 

21  Hi 

L08 

205 
2211 

L53 

Cubic  Jt. 

9 

12.9 
L08.3 

2  1.2 
10 
1^ 

15.  7 

60.  I 

'.i 

78.  8 
LI 

Acre-fL 

Loveland  and  Greeley 

Hii,r  Thompson  and  Platte  River 

i:;,  linn 

15,200 

S,  HI  III 

1,500 

5,1 

9,<HK) 

Hillsboro 

1,600 

Handy  

7.2IK) 

South  Side 

14,000 

1".,  100 

Big  rhompson 

Ris1  and  <  toss 

1,000 
1,800 

1,000 
1,800 

3.33 
2.00 

107 

179 

2.  8 

Hill  and  Brush  . . . 



Total 

150,533 

109,  033 

41,500 

1.91 

187 

418.2 

B.300 

It  may  appear  that  in  considering  the  duty  of  water  the  irrigating 

season  of  one  hundred  and  eighty  days  is  too  long-;  that  little  irrigat- 
ing is  done  in  April  or  September.  However,  it  is  none  too  Long,  for 
much  of  the  water  is  stored  in  April  and  represents  what  a  cubic  foot 
per  second  accomplishes  with  reservoir  facilities  or  with  a  diversity 
of  crops. 

A  comparison  of  the  above  table  with  the  table  giving  the  flow  of 
the  river  (p.  13)  reveals  a  remarkable  agreement  between  the  averages 
as  estimated  and  what  actually  occurred  in  1901,  showing  it  to  be  an 
average  year,  a  conclusion  which  is  confirmed  by  reports  just  received 
from  the  superintendents  and  commissioners. 

Allowing  for  the  average  amount  of  water  escaping  from  the  district, 
we  have  150.508  acre-feet  used  and  18,287  acre-feet  waste,  giving 
168,820  acre-feet  as  the  discharge  of  the  river,  as  compared  with  171.1 1".> 
acre-feet,  the  average  for  six  years,  as  given  in  the  discharge  table; 
also  L09,033  acre-feet  used  for  direct  irrigation,  as  compared  with  the 
average  of  100,271  acre-feet;  41.5(H)  acre-feet  stored,  as  compared 
with  the  average  of  43,170  acre-feet.  In  the  table  the  Rist  Ditch  is 
given  as  diverting  a  total  of  9,900 acre-feet,  while  using  but  3,600; 
the  difference,  6,300  acre-feet,  was  stored  in  Mariano  Lake,  and  is 
accordingly  charged  to  the  Home  Supply  Canal,  making  its  total 
28,382  acre-feet  instead  of  22,082  acre-feet,  the  quantity  diverted. 
The  duty  of  water,  it  will  be  noticed,  for  the  district  i-  lv7  acres  per 
cubic  foot  per  second,  running  one  hundred  and  eighty  days,  and  the 
land  was  covered  to  an  average  depth  of  1.9  feet.  If  we  add  the 
amount  of  precipitation  on  the  land,  the  total  depth  would  probably 
be  nearly  3.5  feet.  Rain,  however,  does  little  good,  since  the  greater 
part  comes  as  light  showers.  Therefore,  it  is  more  to  the  point  to  con- 
sider simply  the  amount  of  water  spread  on  the  land. 


46 

It  will  be  noticed  from  the  table  that  the  smaller  ditches  have  a 
much  lower  duty  than  the  larger  ones,  and  those  with  reservoirs  gen- 
erally show  a  higher  duty  than  those  without.  One  cause  of  the  low 
duty  under  the  small  ditches  is  that  they  cover  the  lowlands  lying 
near  the  river,  which,  on  aceount  of  their  porous  subsoil,  require  more 
water,  and  which,  being  generally  rough,  require  a  larger  volume  to 
force  the  water  over  the  uneven  surface.  Another  cause  is  that  the 
smaller  ditches  in  this  district  have  the  older  and  probably  excessive 
decrees,  making  economy  of  use  unnecessary.  With  these  decrees 
and  the  poor  construction  and  management  of  the  ditches,  it  is  sur- 
prising that  the  duty  is  not  lower  than  shown. 

It  is  hard  to  compare  the  duty  under  the  ditches  with  and  without 
reservoirs,  as  conditions  opposite  to  the  above  exist  under  the  ditches 
themselves.  Being  able  to  use  water  when  and  how  it  is  most  bene- 
ficial, the  owners  feel  that  economy  of  use  means  greater  acreage  irri- 
gated. Loss,  of  course,  occurs  from  the  reservoirs  through  seepage 
and  evaporation  and  partially  offsets  the  economy  practiced;  but  as 
this  loss  is  not  allowed  for  in  the  tables,  it  would  appear  that  the 
better  land  irrigated,  the  better  management,  better  ditches,  and  more 
economical  use  not  only  make  up  for  all  loss  from  the  reservoir,  but 
leave  a  large  margin  besides. 

SEEPAGE. 

Seepage  and  return  water  c  upies  a  position  secondary  only  to  the 
supply  furnished  by  the  ditches  and  reservoirs.  While  in  volume  it 
is  small,  the  regularity  and  reliability  make  such  waters  valuable  in 
irrigation  out  of  all  proportion  to  the  quantity.  Seepage  is  in  part  a 
necessary  result  of  irrigation,  which  can  not  under  any  condition  be 
remedied;  in  part  a  result  of  the  methods,  which  are  theoretical ly 
wrong,  but  more  economical  in  practical  application,  and  in  part  the 
result  of  carelessness  and  ignorance. 

The  application  of  water  to  the  surface  of  the  ground  must  result  in 
a  certain  amount  percolating  through  the  soil  before  it  is  either 
evaporated  or  taken  up  by  the  growing  plant,  and  ultimately  finding 
its  way  to  the  lower  level  of  the  water  courses.  No  piping,  cementing 
of  canals,  or  economy  of  use  can  avoid  this.  The  value  of  water  and 
the  cost  of  labor  determine  at  what  point  it  is  economy  to  waste  the 
one  and  reduce  the  other,  or  to  save  the  one  and  increase  the  other. 
In  practical  irrigating,  therefore,  it  is  often  economy  to  use  more 
water  than  necessary  in  order  to  reduce  the  expense  of  labor  in  spread- 
ing it  on  the  land,  and  this  excess  produces  increased  seepage.  The 
possession  of  an  old  and  abundant  water  right  does  not  convey  the  right 
to  use  the  privilege  wastefully  and  to  the  harm  of  others  less  fortunate. 
In  practice,  however,   it  is  impossible  to  prevent  this  abuse,  which  is 


17 

illegal"  :um1  to  be  condemned.  It  is  a  delicate  matter  to  determine 
when  and  how  much  water  is  necessary  t<>  a  piece  of  land;  to  step  in 
and  say  only  so  much  water  is  needed,  when  the  court  has  determined 
that  much  more  i-  needed.  Only  in  the  most  flagrant  cases  is  it 
possible  for  the  water  officials  to  interfere  with  what  is  conceived  to 
be  "established  rights."  Fortunately,  much  of  this  water  is  returned 
as  "•seepage,"  or.  more  properly,  "waste"  water.  So  prevalent  i- 
this  waste  that  it  has  become  a  recognized  and  reliable  source  of  sup- 
ply and  is  almost  synonymous  with  seepage.  Nearly  all  filings,  which 
claim  seepage  water,  claim  as  well  storm  and  waste  water. 

In  tin1  table  below  are  given  the  claims  for  water  tiled  during  the 
last  thirteen  years  on  the  Big  Thompson,  showing  the  activity  in  the 
different  lines  during  the  different  years. 


Filings  for  water  mi  Big  Thompson  River,  1888-1900,  as  shown  by  Qu  records  of  tlw  oilier 

of  the  Stati  enginei  r. 


Year. 

Reservoirs. 

Seepage  reservoirs. 

Ditch.-. 

Seepage  ditches. 

N... 

Capacity. 

No. 

Capacity. 

No. 

Capacity. 

Cubit-  fit 

pt  1-  sec. 
233. 00 

:;7.  ii 

27.  18 
71.20 

No. 

Capacity. 

1888 

1 

cubic  feet. 
200,  000,  000 

<  'uhic  ft  <  t. 

1 
3 
3 

Cubit-  fit 

pi  i-  sec. 

1889 







L890 

7 
9 

323,  100, 000 
696,034,831 

1891  .. 

..... 

1 

1 
■j 

:! 

1 
:. 

s 

1 

L892 

1 
1 
1 

1,  It  IS,  000 

7.L'S-_>.(|(K) 
1,350.000 

•S.IKt 

1893 

1 
1 

3,329,666,000 

600,259,000 

1,305,972,360 

:;  50 

1894 

If..  70 

1895 

IT 

L896 

5 

279, 94%  000 

135.00 

is<>7 

1 
3 

4-2,  169,000 
23,  270, 000 

2 

1 

26.60 
L2.85 

6.00 

1898 

2 

1 

7(1,125,000 
248,000,000 

22.  65 

1899 

58.50 

l'JOO 

3 

o;;2,35fi,000 

5.00 

Total 

•M 

6,  853,  427, 191 
221,078,296 

17 

608,  174,000 
35,774,941 

12 

408.  47 
34.04 

26 

267.  85 

Average 

10.30 

It  might  be  said  that  most  of  the  filings  to  1893  were  for  reservoirs 
already  in  existence,  as  the  Mariano,  Lone  Tree,  and  Loveland  lakes. 
It  will  be  noticed  that  the  claims  for  both  ditches  and  reservoirs  claim- 
ing seepage  water  began  in  L892,  and  that  they  have,  generally  speak- 
ing, increased  in  both  number  and  capacity  since  that  time.  It  will 
be  noticed,  also,  that  the  seepage  ditches  and  reservoirs  are  small  as 
compared  with  the  average  appropriations  from  the  river.  The  seep- 
age ditches  average  but  10.3  cubic  feet  per  second.  Even  this  is  too 
high,  as  one  ditch  alone  in  1896  claimed  135  cubic  feet  per  second,  an 
obvious  error.  Excluding  this  we  have  the  average  claimed  capacity 
of  the  seepage  ditches  5.11  cubic  feet  per  second,  as  compared  with  a 
claimed  capacity  of  3^.04:  cubic  feet  per  second  for  ditches  direct  from 
the  river.     A  like  difference  exists  in  the  capacities  of  the  two  classes 

«The  statutes  of  Colorado  expressly  prohibit  the  excessive  or  wasteful  use  of 
water.     Session  Laws  of  Colorado,  1895,  p.  VM . 


48 

of  reservoirs.     The  seepage  of  the  district  is  probably  not  equal  to 

the  25  claims  for  132.83  cubic  feet  per  second. 

Seepage  measurements  on  the  river  show  that  the  return  waters  arc 
probably  close  to  50  cubic  feet  per  second,  but  much  water  does  not 
reach  the  river,  being  taken  up  and  diverted  from  the  small  draws  and 
depressions  where  it  first  appears.  As  will  he  seen  on  the  map,  the 
seepage  ditches,  represented  by  the  broken  lines,  do  not  head  near  the 
river,  hut  under  and  near  some  of  the  large  canals.  This  water  does 
notappear  in  the  measurement  of  the  river,  and  its  quantity  can  not 
be  determined.  It  probably  equals  the  amount  which  does  reach  the 
river,  and  the  two  should  then  equal  100  cubic  feet  per  second.  With 
an  average  How,  as  shown  heretofore,  of  237  cubic  feet  per  second, 
the  seepage  water  would  equal  -12  per  cent  of  the  flow,  and  that 
returning  to  the  river  would  be  21  per  cent.  On  the  Cache  la 
Poudre  River  the  return  water,  according  to  the  investigations  of 
Professor  Carpenter,  of  the  agricultural  experiment  station,  is  30  per 
cent.  Sufficient  measurements  of  seepage  have  not  been  made  on  the 
Big  Thompson  to  give  more  than  approximate  figures,  but  from  data 
at  hand  21  per  cent  seems  at  least  a  conservative  estimate.  In  prac- 
tice it  is  found  that  the  Hill  and  Brush,  the  Hillsboro,  and  the  Evans 
Town  ditches  are  supplied  largely  during  the  latter  part  of  the  season 
with  seepage  water.  The  great  value  of  seepage  water  is  that  its 
greatest  flow  occurs  at  the  time  of  least  flow  in  the  river  and  supplies 
water  when  most  needed. 

In  the  consolidation  of  ditches  it  will  always  be  necessary  to  main- 
tain some  on  the  lower  river  to  take  advantage  of  the  return  water. 
One  large  high  line  ditch  on  each  side  of  the  river  with  one  or  more 
seepage  ditches  below  should  be  all  that  is  necessary.  The  only  objec- 
tion to  the  use  of  seepage  water  appears  to  be  that  it  is  often  quite 
strongly  impregnated  with  alkali,  and  on  evaporating  leaves  alkali 
deposited  on  the  land.  On  the  Big  Thompson  there  appears  to  be 
very  little  trouble  from  this,  because  of  the  small  amount  of  alkali  in 
the  district  and  because  much  of  it  has  already  leached  and  passed 
away.  It  has  been  observed  that  lands  ruined  by  alkali  have  in  time 
recovered  and  the  alkali  has  almost  entirely  disappeared,  the  water, 
surface  and  underflow,  passing  through  the  soil  Inning  carried  away 
most  of  the  surplus.  Much  of  mineral  matter  that  is  required  by  plant 
growth  is  contained  in  alkali,  and  when  not  in  too  great  quantities  it 
is  a  benefit  to  the  soil,  so  that  the  leaching  done  by  the  surplus  water 
used  in  irrigating  deprives  the  land  in  one  place  of  beneficial  ingre- 
dients, which,  concentrated  and  deposited  on  other  land,  makes  them 
worthless.  There  are  few  spots  which  in  their  natural  state  contain 
alkali  in  such  quantities  as  to  make  it  harmful.  It  is  the  disturbance 
of  its  natural  and  even  distribution  through  the  earth  by  water  and 
consequent  concentration  in  spots  or  on  the  surface  that  makes  it 
harmful. 


49 

Little  has  as  yet  been  done  in  district  No.  I  toward  the  reclamation 

of  such  lands  as  has  been  spoiled  by  seepage  water,  though  their  are 
seveml  places  of  considerable  area,  probably  2,000  acres  in  all.  which 
could  be  reclaimed  with  profit.  The  practice  of  draining  land  is  of 
very  recent  origin  in  this  State  and  the  methods  not  well  developed. 
The  most  common  method  and  that  giving  best  results  is  t<>  dig  an 
open  trench  along  the  upper  edge  of  the  swamped  land  or  near  the 
foot  of  the  first  raise  of  sufficient  depth  to  intercept  the  inflowing  seep- 
age water;  having  done  this,  the  water  is  conducted  by  open  cut  or 
pipe  with  sufficient  fall  to  give  a  good  velocity  to  the  river  or  into 
some  ditch  where  it  may  he  exchanged  or  used  for  irrigation  in  the 
same  manner  as  reservoir  water.  The  amount  of  water  thus  reclaimed 
is  of  ten  sufficient  to  pay  for  the  expense  of  draining.  Attempt- to 
drain  land  with  tiling  under  the  surface  and  in  the  wet  ground  have 
not  been  successful.  The  abundance  of  land  and  the  cost  of  tiling 
would  in  most  cases  make  this  method  unprofitable,  even  if  it  "were 
practical.  After  reclamation  this  land  soon  returns  to  its  former  con- 
dition, producing  excellent  second  bottom  hay,  or,  if  put  into  grain, 
sufficient  moisture  is  present  to  mature  the  crops  without  irrigation. 

ADMINISTRATION  AND  DISTRIBUTION. 

In  the  administration  of  ditches  and  reservoirs  and  in  the  distribu- 
tion to  the  consumers  there  may  be  said  to  be  two  distinct  sets  of  offi- 
cials, those  of  ditch  or  reservoir  companies  of  a  private  character  and 
those  of  the  State  and  district  of  a  public  character.  A  ditch  or  res- 
ervoir company  has  a  president,  secretary,  and  treasurer,  with  duties 
similar  to  those  of  any  incorporated  company.  There  is  a  man  who 
patrols  the  canal  and  distributes  the  water  to  the  consumers  accord- 
ing to  their  proportion  of  stock  or  rights  in  the  ditch.  He  is  called 
the  ditch  " boss,"  *' rider,"  or  "superintendent,"  and  acts  generally 
under  the  direction  of  the  other  officers  or  directors.  In  most  cases 
it  is  he  who  receives  orders  from  the  public  officers  and  acts  in  con- 
junction with  them. 

Various  devices  and  units  of  measurement  are  used  in  distributing 
the  water;  the  more  common,  and  those  used  in  this  district,  are  the 
division  box  for  pro  rata  division  and  the  ordinary  culvert  placed 
through  the  bank  of  the  ditch.  Where  ditches  are  small  the  division 
box  is  quite  satisfactory.  This  is  a  simple  flume  with  level  bottom  and 
vertical  sides,  and  of  about  the  same  cross  section  as  the  ditch.  It  is 
divided  by  a  partition  running  lengthwise  of  it,  the  respective  widths 
of  the  parts  being  in  proportion  to  the  number  of  share-  to  be  turned 
out  and  to  the  number  of  shares  in  the  ditch  at  that  point.  For 
instance,  if  there  are  100  shares  in  all  and  20  had  been  taken  out  above, 
leaving  so  shares  in  the  ditch,  and  it  was  desired  to  turn  out  10  shares 

2817— No.  118—02 4 


50 

at  this  point,  the  box  being  8  feel  wide,  one  division  would  be  made 
7  feel  wide,  the  other  1  foot  wide  the  part  flowing  into  the  smaller 
section  being  withdrawn  from  the  side  while  the  rest  flows  on  down 
the  ditch.  Where  the  ditch  Lb  large,  if  the  rider  knows  the  amount 
of  water  at  his  disposal,  he  can  turn  out  at  any  point  a  proportionate 
amount  through  the  culvert,  which  is  nothing  more  than  a  rectanffu- 
lar  wooden  pipe  Bet  through  the  hank  of  the  ditch.  By  opening  or 
closing  the  sliding  valve  at  the  end  of  the  box  he  can  regulate  the 
How.  A  rise  or  fall  in  the  ditch  will  alter  the  quantity,  of  course,  hut 
the  variation  is  probably  not  enough  to  affect  the  result  seriously,  and 
in  any  case  a  rise  or  fall  will  affect  all  alike.  Where  the  water  i-  -old 
by  measure  more  accurate  method-  are  desired.  In  such  cases  an 
additional  measuring  flume  or  weir  is  placed  in  the  lateral,  and  the 
outlet  gates  are  regulated  until  the  proper  depth  is  attained  in  the 
flume  or  over  the  weir. 

The  water  in  the  river  is  divided  among  the  different  ditches  in 
accordance  with  their  priorities  by  the  public  officials,  who  are  the 
water  commissioners  of  the  district,  appointed  by  the  governor  upon 
recommendation  of  the  hoards  of  county  commissioners  of  the  counties 
in  which  they  are  to  serve,  the  superintendents  of  irrigation  for  each 
division,  and  the  State  engineer,  also  appointed  by  the  governor. 

A  water  commissioner  generally  has  charge  of  a  single  tributary  or 
of  a  section  of  the  main  stream,  and  it  is  his  duty  to  visit  each  ditch 
whenever  it  is  necessary  to  regulate  the  amount  of  water  flowing  into 
it:  he  reports  to  the  superintendent  as  often  as  necessary,  stating  the 
volume  being  carried  by  each  ditch,  the  volume  coming  into  and  going 
out  of  his  district,  and  the  volume  required  to  till  all  ditches.  The 
superintendent  from  these  reports  knows  whether  the  water  is  being 
properly  divided  among  the  different  districts,  and  if  it  is  not  orders 
the  commissioner  of  one  district  to  take  more  water,  or  less,  and  speci- 
fies the  volume  which  should  be  allowed  to  pass  into  the  district  below, 
his  orders  being  generally  to  close  all  ditches  with  priorities  subse- 
quent to  a  certain  date.  Protests  against  the  actions  of  the  commis- 
sioner are  made  to  the  superintendent,  who  passes  upon  the  points  in 
dispute.  If  his  determination  is  unsatisfactory  to  any  one  interested, 
appeal  may  be  taken  to  the  State  engineer  and  from  him  to  the  dis- 
trict court.  The  commissioners  are  subject  to  the  orders  of  the  super- 
intendent, and  both  to  those  of  the  State  engineer. 

The  commissioners  are  paid  £.5  per  day  for  each  day  they  are  on 
duty,  and  the  superintendent  a  like  sum,  his  term  of  service  continu- 
ing a-  long  a-  any  commissioner  in  his  division  i-  at  work.  In  most 
cases  this  is  for  the  entire  year.  In  the  winter  the  storing  of  water 
and  the  repair  of  head  gates  and  placing  of  rating  flumes  and  weirs  are 
in  progress,  and  the  commissioner,  besides  attending  to  the  dividing 
of  the  water  for  storage,  usually  gh  es  directions  and  advice  concerning 


51 

the  requirements  and  the  best  methods  of  placing  the  gates  and  flumes. 
Superintendents  and  commissioners  arc  paid  equally  by  the  Beveral 
counties  in  which  they  serve  (in  some  cases  as  many  as  ten  <>r  fifteen 
counties)  and  suffer  the  inconvenience  of  having  their  bills  audited 
that  number  of  times.  The  State  engineer  receives  a  yearly  salary, 
paid  by  the  State. 

Besides  the  duty  of  distributing  and  dividing  the  water,  the  com- 
missioner is  required  to  gather. crop  statistics  and  to  see  that  no  water 

is  wasted;  and  while  he  lias  no  power  to  settle  disputes  over  the  dis- 
tribution of  water  which  is  in  the  ditches,  by  mutual  agreement  he  is 
generally  made  arbitrator  in  these  family  disputes. 

The  State1  engineer  occupies  a  somewhat  anomalous  position  in  the 
irrigation  system.  While  it  is  true  the  law  places  him  at  the  head  of 
affairs,  he  does  not  in  fact  act  in  that  capacity  unless  some  ditch  or 
canal  owner,  feeling  aggrieved  at  the  rulings  of  a  superintendent, 
appeals  to  him.  In  addition,  the  State  engineer  is  required  by  law  to 
gather  and  compile  data  of  rain  and  snow  fall,  measure  the  streams, 
rate  ditches,  measure  and  keep  records  of  reservoirs,  examine  their 
dams,  supervise  their  construction  or  repair,  condemn  unsafe  struc- 
tures, and  give  professional  advice  to  other  departments  of  the  State 
administration. 

In  this  district,  most  of  the  ditches  being  owned  by  the  water  users, 
few  written  contracts  exist,  the  conduct  of  the  ditch  officers  being 
determined  by  the  by-lawsand  constitutions  adopted  by  the  ditch  com- 
panies. In  most  cases,  whether  the  flow  in  the  ditch  be  great  or  small, 
the  water  is  distributed  pro  rata.  Often,  by  agreement,  when  water 
is  short  one  section  of  the  ditch  will  use  all  the  water  for  a  few  days, 
after  which  it  is  given  to  the  consumers  on  the  next  section. 

The  cost  of  distribution  is  quite  small  and  is  approximately  as 
follows  for  this  district,  which  is  fairly  representative  of  the  more 
important  and  better  settled  districts: 

Cost  of  distribution  oftuater,  water  district  No.  4- 


Officials. 


State  engineer's  office 

Superintendent  of  irrigation 

Water  commissioner.., 

•  officers  of  the  ditch  companies  1 12  companies). 

Ditch  riders  (12  ditches) 

Miscellaneous  and  extra  help 


year. 


$100 

100 

1,000 
2,000 
5,000 
1.800 


Total. 


10,000 


Paid  by- 


State. 
Counties. 

Do. 
Ditch  companies. 

Do. 


That  is  to  say,  the  total  cost  of  distributing  the  water  from  the  river 
to  the  ditches  is  about  $1,200,  and  from  the  main  canals  to  the  Laterals 
$8,800,  a  total  of  $10,000  per  year  for  perhaps  80,000  acre-,  or  12£ 
cents  per  acre. 


52 

In  the  management  of  small  ditches  the  officers  act  without  compen- 
sation, and  the  ditch  riders  receive  perhaps  $50  per  year,  the  only  time 
w  hen  tlic\  are  on  duty  being  when  the  ditches  are  being  put  in  repair. 
It  is  seldom  that  the  other  officers  receive  compensation.  It  is  only 
whin  the  consumers  are  not  the  owner-  of  the  ditch  and  where  the 
carrying  of  water  i^  expected  to  return  interest  on  the  investment — 
where,  as  it  is  generally  stated,  water  is  "sold"  by  a  ditch  corporation 
to  the  consumer— that  the  cost  of  administration  and  distribution  is  any 
considerable  item.  In  that  case  the  manager,  secretary,  bookkeeper, 
treasurer,  and  a  regularly  employed  attorney,  as  in  any  corporation. 
seem  to  be  necessary,  and  are  of  course  expensive.  The  cooperative 
ditch  needs  no  such  complicated  machinery,  and  the  success  of  cooper- 
ative ditches  where  corporation  ditches  have  failed  is  largely  due  to 
this  fact. 

TITLES  TO  WATER. 

Nearly  all  questions  that  come  before  either  the  administrative 
department  or  before  the  court-  resolve  themselves  into  the  rights  of 
the  parties  and  their  titles  to  the  water.     The  title  itself  depends  upon — 

(1)  The  construction  of  canal  and  use  of  water,  and  the  regularity 
of  procedure  in  perfecting  rights. 

(2)  The  relation  to  other  appropriators  and  their  rights,  including 
the  right  of  transfer  and  sale. 

(3)  The  nature  of  the  grant,  when  issued,  and  of  the  privilege- 
granted. 

(4)  The  good  faith  shown  by  the  grantee. 

(5)  His  compliance  with  the  provisions  of  the  grant  and  nonaban- 
donment  of  rights. 

These  five  will  include  nearly  every  case  in  the  conflict. 

The  right  to  the  use  of  water  for  beneficial  purpose-  was  recognized 
by  Territorial  laws  as  early  as  1861,  and  affirmed  by  Congress  in  1866. 
The  constitution  of  the  State,  adopted  in  1876,  declared  water  to  he 
public  property  and  subject  to  appropriation.  These  declarations 
were  deemed  necessary,  as  riparian  rights  had  been  upheld  in  the 
older  States,  and  might  by  inference  have  become  attached  to 
Colorado. 

At  first  water  was  taken  from  the  river  and  used  without  thought 
of  its  ever  becoming  scarce  or  of  there  being  a  conflict  for  it-  posses- 
sion. The  lands  then  considered  farming  land-  were  so  limited  that 
there  was  apparently  more  water  than  would  ever  be  used.  Even  at 
the  time  the  decrees  were  granted  many  still  entertained  this  opinion 
and  did  not  enter  their  claims  nor  examine  into  the  claims  of  other-. 
In  effect  this  does  not  deprive  them  of  the  right  to  water,  but  in  the 
distribution  the  water  commissioner  ignores  their  claims,  thus  forcing 
applications  for  decrees.     Prior  to  1871*  there  was  no  requirement  in 


53 

law  relative  to  the  filing  of  claims  to  water  and  adjudications  of  rights, 
though  the  necessity  of  some  definite  determination  of  the  rights  of 
different  claimants  had  been  recognized  for  sometime  prior  to  thai 
year.  As  soon  as  a  scarcity  began  to  be  felt  the  difficulty  of  dividing 
the  water  and  the  necessity  <»i"  a  (dear  statement  of  each  consumer's 
right  forced  some  action  by  the  legislature,  which  up  to  thai  time  had 
seemed  unable  to  appreciate  the  importance  of  early  action  or  unwill- 
ing to  take  the  initial  steps.  There  was  a  belief  also  that  the  ditch 
itself  was* evidence  of  a  right;  that  water  having  once  been  used  on 
land  thereby  becomes  appurtenant  to  it.  It  was  thought  that  a  deed 
to  the  land  conveyed  the  right  to  the  water  which  had  been  used 
thereon.  A  series  of  years  with  abundant  flow  encouraged  the  irri- 
gation of  a  good  deal  of  land,  but  when  these  were  followed  at  length 
by  a  year  of  small  ilow  the  necessity  of  depriving  some  oik4  of  water 
forced  the  establishment  of  a  rule  whereby  this  could  be  done.  In 
tin1  early  days  water  was  abundant  for  the  land  irrigated,  and  the 
causes  of  a  short  supply  were,  as  stated  a  slow  decrease  in  the  late 
tlow,  from  deforestation  on  the  one  hand,  and  on  the  other  a  con- 
stantly growing  demand  for  later  water  for  the  rapidly  increasing 
acreage  of  alfalfa  and  crops  other  than  grain.  The  cultivation  of 
great  areas  of  mesa  lands,  like  that  begun  by  the  Union  Colony  at 
Greeley  in  1870,  was  of  course  the  greatest  factor  in  calling  attention 
to  the  short  supply. 

Op  to  the  time  of  the  passage  of  the  law  of  1879  many  of  the  later 
users  contended  that  the  water  must  be  pro  rated  in  accordance  with 
the  old  law  of  1861,  amended  in  1870.  This  law  provided  that  the 
county  judge  should  appoint  three  commissioners,  whose  duty  it  was 
to  "apportion  in  a  just  and  equitable  proportion  a  certain  amount  of 
said  water  upon  certain  or  alternate  weekly  days  to  different  Locali- 
ties." In  1879  the  legislature  passed  the  first  bill  intended  to  meet 
the  conditions  existing.  Exclusive  jurisdiction  was  by  this  law  vested 
in  the  district  court  whose  territory  embraced  the  water  district. 
"But  when  the  water  district  extended  into  more  than  one  county, 
the  court  of  the  county  in  which  tin4  first  regular  term  after  the  1st 
day  of  December  of  each  year  shall  soonest  occur  shall  be  the  proper 
court."  and  such  court  retained  jurisdiction  to  final  settlement.  The 
district  judge  was  required  to  appoint  a  referee  to  take  testimony,  who 
should  issue  a  notice  stating  the  time  and  place  where  he  would  hold 
court,  notifying  aU  interested  parties  to  be  present  and  to  submit 
proofs  of  claims  or  present  objection-  to  the  claims  of  others.  The 
referee  could  call  and  examine  witnesses,  and  he  submitted  his  find- 
ings to  the  court  for  final  adjudication.  Those  refusing  to  present 
their  claims  were  barred  as  against  those  submitting  proof.  Appeal 
from  the  decree  of  the  judge  could  be  made  within  two  years,  and  the 
court  would  thereupon  order  a  rehearing. 


54 

Little  was  done  under  this  law.  many  details  of  procedure  being 
omitted.     In   L881,  therefore,  the  act  was  amended,  making  further 

77  c 

provisions  for  settling  and  recording  priorities  of  right,  viz,  a  pro- 
vision for  petitioning  the  district  court  to  proceed  to  an  adjudication 
of  rights,  for  the  water  commissioner  to  keep  a  record  of  decrees,  and 

that  the  county  clerk  should  record  them:  also  for  numbering  the 
decrees,  for  keeping  the  testimony  where  it  could  be  inspected  by 
interested  parties,  for  fixing  the  method  of  procedure  in  cases  of 
appeals  to  the  supreme  court,  which  court  could  then  render  a  decree, 
and  providing  that  four  years  in  place  of  two  be  allowed  in  which 
proceedings  may  be  begun  to  set  aside  the  decrees. 

The  present  practice  in  obtaining  title  to  water  is  to  have  the  ditch 
or  reservoir  surveyed  and  platted,  then  either  before  or  after  con- 
struction statements  are  filed  in  the  offices  of  the  State  engineer  and 
county  recorder.  After  completion  of  the  works  and  after  the  water 
has  been  applied  to  the  land  a  petition  is  presented  to  the  district 
court  asking  that  the  rights  be  defined;  after  proper  notice  to  all 
interested  parties  and  due  publication,  the  evidence  is  taken  by  the 
judge  or  a  referee,  and  decree  entered  according  to  the  findings.  The 
water  commissioner  and  other  officials  are  notified  by  the  clerk  of  the 
court,  and  a  copy  of  the  decree  is  furnished.  Adverse  claimants  may, 
within  four  years,  present  their  protest  to  the  court,  and  the  usual 
court  procedure  establishes  the  contested  rights.  The  following  cir- 
cular, issued  by  the  State  engineer's  office,  gives  the  forms  used  at 
present  for  filing  claims  to  ditch  and  reservoir  rights,  and  is  in  accord- 
ance with  the  laws  now  in  force: 

[Circular.] 

State  Engineer's  Office,  Denver,  Colo. 
Instructions  for  preparing  sworn  statements  and    maps  in  the  appropriation  of 
water  for  ditches,  canals,  and  reservoirs,  and  for  the  preparation  of  plans  of  specifi- 
cations for  dams. 

RECORDING    STATEMENTS   OF   CLAIMS   TO    WATER   RIGHTS. 

State  of  Colorado,  County  of ,  ss: 

Statement  of  claim  to  water  right. 

Irrigation  division  Xo.  — .     Water  district  Xo.  — . 

The  undersigned, ,  owner —  of  the    following-described    ditch,  in 

compliance  with  the  requirements  of  general  section  Xo.  1720  of  the  general  stat- 
utes of  the  State  of  Colorado,  and   the  amendments  thereto,  hereby  make  this 

statement  for  filing  in  the  proper  offices: 

1.  The  name —  of  the  owner —  of  the  said  ditch, ,  whose  post-office 

address  is ,  county  of . 

2.  The  name  of  the  said  ditch  is  the ditch. 

3.  The  head  gate   of  the  said  ditch   is   located  on  the bank  of  ,  from 

which  stream  said  ditch  diverts  its  auppy  of  water,  at  a  point  whence  the cor- 
ner of  section  ,  in  township ,  of  range west,  bears feet. 

From  the  head  gate  the  said  ditch   inns  in  a  general direction,  as  show!!  on 


55 

the  map  hereto  attached  and  made  a  part  of  this  statement;  which  said  map  also 
Bhows  the  <»\\  nership  of  the  lands  over  which  said  ditch  passes,  and  distances  of  the 
ditch  line  from  the  <  rovernment  corners. 

I.  The  length  of  the  said  ditch  Is miles. 

5.  The  width  of  the  said  ditch  is-        feel  on  the  bottom  and  feel   ai   the 

high-water  line. 

6.  The  depth  of  said  ditch  is feel  at  high-water  line. 

7.  The  grade  of  said  ditch  is ■  feet  per  mile. 

8.  The  carrying  capacity  of  the  said  ditch  is cubic  feel  of  water  per  Becond  of 

time. 

9.  \V«.rk  was  commenced  on  the  said  ditch  onthi day  of ,  A.  1).  19—. 

10.  The enlargement  of  said  ditch  was  < imenced  on  the day  of , 

A.  D.  19     . 

II.  The  said  ditch,  as  enlarged,  is feel  wide  on  the  bottom,  feet  wide  at 

high-water  mark,  feet  deep  at    high-water  mark,   and   the  increased  capacity 

arising  from  such  enlargement  is cubic  feel  of  water  per  second  of  time. 

I  Signed. ) 
Reservoir  statements  for  filing  should  be  as  follows: 

State  ok  Colorado,  County  of ,  8«: 

Statement  of  claim  t<>  water  right. 

Irrigation  division  No.  — .     Water  district  No.  — . 

The   undersigned, ,  owner — of  the  following-described   reservoir,  in 

compliance  with  the  requirements  of  general  section  x...  1720  of  the  general  statutes 
of  the  State  oi  ( lolorado,  and  the  amendments  thereto,  do—  hereby  make  this  state- 
ment for  tiling  in  the  proper  offices: 

1.   The  name —  of  the  owner —  of  said  reservoir,  ,  whose  \  ost-office  address 

is ,  county  of . 

•_'.  The  name  of  said  reservoir  is  the reservoir. 

3.  The  said  reservoir  is  situated  on  the ]  of  the \,  the \  of  the \t 

the 1  of  the \,  and  the \  of  tin \  of  section ,  in  township , 

of  range ,  in county  aforesaid. 

The of  said   reservoir   being  at  a  point  when   the corner  of  said  section 

hears feet. 

4.  The  area  of  said  reservoir  at  the  high-water  line  is acres  and  at  low-water 

line  is acres.      The  depth  of  water  that  can  be  drawn  off  is  ■ feet,  making  the 

available  capacity  for  storage cubic  feet,  for  which  claim  is  hereby  made. 

5.  The  said  reservoir  derives  its  supply  of  water  from  the through  the 

ditch,  thi»  head  gate  of  which  is  located  at  a  point  whence  the corner  section 

,  in  township ,  of  range ,  bears  ,  feet.  Said  ditch  has  a  carry- 
ing capacity  of cubic  feet  of  water  per  second  of  time. 

The  head  gate  of  the  feeder  from  said  ditch  to  the  -aid  reservoir  is  at  a  point 

whence  the  corner  section  ,  in   township ,  of  range  ,  hears  , 

feet. 

6.  Said  feeder  is feet  wide  on  the  bottom,  -feet  wide  at  high-water  mark; 

is feet  deep,  with  a  grade  of feet  per  mile  and  a  carrying  capacity  of 

cubic  feet  of  water  per  second  of  time. 

7.  Work  was  commenced  on  said  reservoir  on  the day  of ,  A.  D.  19—,  and 

on  the  feeder  above  described,  on  the day  of ,  A.  I).  I'1 

8.  The  outlet  ditch   from  said  reservoir  is feet  wide  on  the  bottom,  feet 

wide  at  high-water  mark;  is feet  deep,  has  a  grade  of feet  per  mile  and  a 

carrying  capacity  of cubic  feet  of  water  per  second  of  time. 

9.  Work  was  commenced  on  said  outlet  on  the day  of ,  A.  D.  19 — . 

(Signed.) 


56 

LAWS. 

The  water  laws  of  the  State  bave  been  discussed  heretofore  in  bul- 
letins issued  by  the  Department  of  Agriculture  more  fully  than  i» 
here  possible;  therefore  the  briefest  outlines  and  the  statement  of  the 

fundamental   principles  only  which    underlie  the  law  and  are  the  basis 
of  our  court  decisions  are  given. 

Jn  Bulletin  No.  58,  Office  of  Experiment  Stations,  Tinted  States 
Department  of  Agriculture,  issued  in  L899,  the  laws  were  given  and 
discussed  at  some  length,  and  in  Bulletin  No.  60,  of  the  ^ame  office, 
issued  in  L899,  the  methods  and  laws  governing  the  acquiring  of  title 
to  water  were  published. 

The  right  of  appropriation,  as  stated,  is  based  upon  the  Territorial 
laws,  the  act  of  Congress  in  L866,  and  the  State  constitution,  which 
latter  declares:  "The  water  of  every  natural  stream  not  heretofore 
appropriated  is  hereby  declared  to  he  tin4  property  of  the  public 
and  is  dedicated  to  the  use  of  the  people  of  the  State,  subject  to 
appropriation."  " 

Theoretically,  the  fundamental  principle  of  our  laws,  and  one  that 
should  he  the  basis  of  all  irrigation  laws,  is  that  the  water  is  the  prop- 
erty of  the  people,  and  the  right  to  its  use  depends  upon  its  being 
a  beneficial  application.  It  does  not  matter  what  a  person's  decree 
may  he.  nor  what  he  may  have  diverted,  nor  for  how  many  years,  nor 
what  his  claims  may  he.  he  should  have  no  right  to  water  which  he 
does  not  need  and  can  not  use  beneficially. 

The  next  question  of  importance  is  whether  or  not  water  attache-  to 
the  land.  The  decisions  of  the  court,  in  the  absence  of  any  law  on  the 
subject,  control  in  Colorado.  Contrary  to  general  belief,  the  State 
supreme  court  held  that  the  water  and  land  were  not  attached:  and 
this  decision  was  the  basis  of  the  greater  part  of  litigation,  permitting 
as  it  does  the  transfer  of  water  and  enlargement  of  ditches  to  the  full 
amount  of  the  decree. 

The  right  of  persons  along  the  borders  of  a  stream  to  an  undimin- 
ished now  has  been  abrogated  in  Colorado,  and  by  the  decision  of  the 
State  supreme  court ''the  common-law  doctrine  of  riparian  rights  is 
inapplicable  to  Colorado."  The  law  abrogating  riparian  rights  is 
slightly  modified,  however,  by  allowing  such  persons  a-  have  enjoyed 
the  benefits  of  water  from  streams  for  meadow  lands  by  the  natural 
overflow,  in  case  the  flow  is  diminished  to  such  an  extent  that  they 
are  denied  the  benefits  of  such  overflow,  to  construct  a  ditch  from  the 
stream  to  irrigate  the  meadow;  the  priority  to  date  from  the  time  when 
the  land  was  first  used  as  a  meadow. 

Priority  of  appropriation  shall  give  the  better  right:  unappropriated 
waters  are  subject   to  appropriation  for  canal  or  reservoir  purp 
and  any  excess  above  that  needed  for  direct  irrigation  may  be  stored. 

"Constitution.  Art.  XVI,  Bee.  510. 


57 

Incorporated  companies  may  obtain  decrees  and  may  collect  fees  as 
common  carriers,  and  as  long  as  there  is  water  in  the  canal  must  per- 
mit persons  under  the  canal  to  use  the  same  upon  the  payment  of  the 
carrying  charge.  This  charge  may  be  regulated  by  the  board  of 
county  commissioners. 

When  water  is  distributed  to  users  or  ditches  for  a  Length  of  time 
proportionate  to  their  claims,  usually  the  maximum  quantity  that  can 
be  used  economically,  the  process  is  known  as  "  prorating."  In  the 
distribution  of  water,  while  prorating  is  not  -auctioned  by  law  in 
tilling  ditches  from  the  river,  it  is  permissible  in  distributing  to  owners 
in  common  under  one  ditch;  the  point  of  difference  being  that  in  one 
case  the  dates  of  decrees  are  different,  in  the  other  they  are  identical. 

The  right  to  the  use  may  be  transferred  from  one  individual  to 
another,  and  a  d(^^\  to  the  land  does  not  carry  the  right  to  the  water 
unless  specifically  mentioned.  Water  may  he  transferred  from  one 
ditch  to  another  and  its  point  of  diversion  changed  up  or  down  the 
stream.  It  may  be  transferred  from  one  drainage  to  another;  it-  place 
and  character  of  use  may  be  changed,  providing  always  that  the  estab- 
lished rights  of  others  in  tin1  waters  are  not  interfered  with. 

The  builders  of  ditches  have  the  power  to  condemn  a  right  of  way. 
Ditches  are  not  subject  to  taxes  except  when  constructed  for  the  pur- 
pose of  deriving  a  revenue  therefrom. 

Domestic  uses  have  no  real  preference  over  agricultural  except 
that  water  used  for  agricultural  purposes  may  he  condemned  when 
necessary  for  domestic  uses.  This  right  of  condemnation  alone  dis- 
tinguishes them. 

Seepage  and  waste  waters  may  be  appropriated  and  are  governed 
by  the  same  laws  as  water  from  streams. 

The  laws  passed  by  the  general  assemblies  of  l*w  and  1901  are 
quite  important;  they  are  interesting  also  as  pointing  out  the  difficul- 
ties to  be  overcome  and  as  showing  the  effort  toward  more  economical 
use  of  water.  The  laws  of  1899  provided  that  tilings  shall  be  examined 
by  the  State  engineer  and  a  fee  for  the  same  collected.  This  is  a  step 
in  the  right  direction;  but  the  State  engineer  can  not  reject  the  tiling-, 
he  having  only  power  to  return  them  and  request  a  more  accurate  and 
complete  statement.  He  does  not  examine  into  the  merits  of  the 
claim  that  reservoirs  covering  more  than  20  acres  or  having  a  dam 
more  than  10  feet  high  shall  be  under  the  control  of  tin1  State  engi- 
neer, both  during  construction  and  afterwards.  He  may  fix  the  height 
to  which  a  reservoir  may  be  tilled  at  any  time.  This  law  provides 
penalties  and  methods  of  procedure  against  dams  deemed  unsafe,  and 
upon  complaint  of  three  persons  the  State  engineer  must  examine  the 
dam  complained  of.  The  costs  of  the  examination  fall  on  the  persons 
making  the  complaint  if  made  on  insufficient  ground— a  very  wise  pro- 
vision, as  it  acts  as  a  check  on  the  ill-considered  reports  people  are  30 


58 

prone  to  make;  at  the  same  time  the  law  stops  the  tendency  of  men  in 
charge  to  overcrowd  the  capacity  of  the  reservoir. 

The  most  important  law.  however,  and  the  one  attracting  the  most 
attention  during  the  legislative  term  of  L899  was  the  one  providing 
for  the  transfer  and  exchange  of  water/'     This  law  is  given  here  in  full: 

Sec.  1.  Every  person  desirous  of  changing  the  point  of  diversion  of  his  right  t<»  nee 
water  from  any  of  the  streams  of  this  State  shall  present  his  petition  to  tin-  district 
court  from  which  the  original  decree  issued,  praying  such  changes  may  1..-  granted 

to  him,  and  the  practice  and  procedure  on  the  hearing  of  Buch  petition  shall  be  the 
same  as  if  said  petition  were  for  an  original  decree.  The  court  shall  require  proof 
that  all  parties  who  may  be  affected  by  such  change  have  been  duly  notified  of  the 
proceeding;  and  shall  hear  evidence  to  determine  whether  or  not  such  change  will 

injuriously  affect  the  vested  rights  of  others  in  and  to  the  use  of  water:  and  if  the  said 
court  shall  find  that  such  change  will  not  injuriously  affect  the  rights  of  others,  a 
decree  shall  be  entered  allowing  said  party  to  make  such  change. 

Sec.  2.  CTpon  the  granting  of  such  decree  as  provided  for  in  the  first  section  hereof, 
the  party  desirous  of  making  such  change  shall  cause  to  he  prepared  two  accurate 
maps  showing  the  old  and  new  ditches,  the  Burrounding  lands,  and  the  lands  of 
other  owners  in  the  vicinity,  in  the  same  manner  a-  required  in  the  case  of  original 
appropriations  of  water,  and  shall  rile  one  of  said  maps  and  a  certified  copy  of  the 
decree  with  the  county  clerk  of  the  county  in  which  the  head  gate  of  the  ditch,  as 
Bought  to  he  changed,  is  situate,  and  another  copy  of  said  map  and  decree  shall  be 
tiled  with  the  State  engineer,  whereupon  said  State  engineer  shall  issue  a  notice  to 
the  water  commissioner  having  jurisdiction  over  said  ditch,  notifying  him  of  the 
change  made,  and  thereupon  said  water  commissioner  shall  allot  the  priority  right 
t<  >  the  use  of  water  to  the  new  ditch  which  formerly  was  allotted  to  the  original  ditch, 
anil  shall  recognize  such  change  in  the  distribution  of  water. 

Sf.c.  3.  It  shall  lie  lawful,  however,  for  the  owners  of  ditches  and  water  rights 
taking  water  from  the  same  stream  to  exchange  with,  and  loan  to,  each  other  for  a 
limited  time  the  water  to  which  each  may  be  entitled,  for  the  purpose  of  saving  crops 
or  of  using  the  water  in  a  more  economical  manner:  Provided^  That  the  owner  or 
owners  making  such  loan  or  exchange  shall  give  notice  in  writing  signed  by  all  the 
owners  participating  in  said  loan  or  exchange  stating  that  such  loan  or  exchange  has 
been  made)  and  for  what  length  of  time  the  same  shall  continue,  whereupon  said 
water  commissioner  shall  recognize  the  same  in  his  distribution  of  water. 

Sec.  4.  In  the  opinion  of  the  general  assembly  an  emergency  exists,  therefore  this 
act  shall  take  effect  and  he  in  force  from  and  after  its  passage. 

Approved,  April  6,  1S99. 

The  first  two  sections  of  the  bill  are  generally  approved,  as  taking 
out  of  the  hands  of  the  irrigation  officials  the  power  to  order  a  change 
from  one  ditch  to  another,  and  as  rendering  any  surreptitious  change 
invalid.  Of  course,  the  great  good  accomplished  is  that  it  gives  notice 
to  all  who  could  he  injuriously  affected  that  they  have  the  right  to 
appear  and  object;  and.  too.  after  the  order  of  change  has  been 
granted  in  accordance  with  law  the  decree  under  the  change  is  not 
Liable  to  be  assailed,  and  so  the  title  is  as  good  and  permanent  as 
though  no  change  had  been  made.  Another  good  feature  is  that  a 
map  of  the  old  and  new  ditches  and  the  lands  thereunder  must  he 
tiled;  this  filing  becomes  a  valuable  document  for   reference  to  the 

iwa  18»,  p.  235. 


59 

irrigation  officials  and  to  those  looking  up  titles  t<»  water  for  lands  in 
that  vicinity,  and  amends  in  sonic  degree  the  lack  of  such  filings  in 
the  early  days.  The  necessity  for  obtaining  a  transfer  decree  before 
the  change  is  made  makes  it  possible  to  ascertain  many  matters  of 
fact,  and  so  affirm  or  deny  statements  made  foror  against  the  transfer. 
The  question  of  the  capacity  of  the  old  ditch  is  not  the  least  impor- 
tant of  these,  affecting  the  amount  which  in  justice  might  be  trans- 
ferred. The  old  ditches  could  seldom  carry  their  full  decrees,  and  so 
a  measurement  on  the  ground  during  the  existence  of  the  old  ditch  is 
certainly  necessary.  In  many  of  the  old  transfers,  by  the  time  a  suit 
was  brought  to  set  it  aside  or  limit  it  the  old  ditch  had  so  filled  up 
and  changed  that  its  original  capacity  could  not  he  determined.  The 
determination  of  seepage  water,  which  contributed  to  till  the  old  ditch, 
can  likewise  he  determined  accurately  only  at  the  time  of  transfer, 
and  not  some  years  Later. 

The  principal  objection  urged  against  these  sections  is  that  they  are 
too  severe  in  their  requirements  for  notification  and  entail  a  consid- 
erable expense.  This  is  probably  true,  hut  transfers  are  serious  mat- 
ters, and  not  to  be  lightly  entered  into,  but  after  due  consideration, 
soberly,  and  in  the  fear  of  litigation.  There  appears  no  way  to  secure 
perfect  right  of  either  original  decree  or  of  transfer  excepting  to  make 
all  persons  who  could  possibly  have  a  claim  on  the  water  parties  t<> 
the  suit,  and  the  matter  of  cost  is  nothing  compared  with  the  feeling 
of  perfect  peace  engendered  by  the  knowledge  of  unassailable  title. 

It  has  recently  been  enunciated  by  one  of  the  district  judge-  that 
the  above  law  simply  states  a  method  of  procedure  which  was  the  only 
legal  way  of  making  a  transfer  before,  and  is  only  in  accordance  with 
the  law  passed  in  L881  prescribing  the  procedure  for  obtaining  decrees. 
It  is  a  great  pity  that  this  fact  has  transpired  only  after  twenty  years 
of  costly  litigation,  and  that  the  above  law  was  necessary  to  call  the 
attention  of  the  legal  profession  and  of  learned  judges  to  these  now 
obvious  facts. 

A  valid  objection  against  a  law  which  puts  obstacles  in  the  way  of 
transfer  is  that  all  such  changes  tend  to  more  economical  use  of  water, 
or  to  its  application  to  more  productive  land,  and  should  be  encouraged. 
Any  legitimate  transfer  has  one  of  these  for  its  object.  The  abandon- 
ment of  the  old  bottom  lands  and  the  redemption  of  warm,  productive 
mesas  is  of  benefit  to  the  community  as  a  whole.  The  application  of 
water  to  more  productive  land,  producing  as  it  does  a  greater  return, 
enhances  the  value  of  the  water,  and  the  more  valuable  the  water  the 
more  carefully  and  economically  it  is  used,  and  the  greater  its  duty. 
By  transfer  several  ditches  can  be  consolidated  into  one;  the  cost  of 
repairs  and  maintenance  diminished,  as  well  as  the  loss  by  seepage  and 
evaporation.  This  saving  by  lessening  seepage  and  evaporation  is 
more   considerable  than  appears  at  first  glance,  for  not  only  is  the 


60 

exposed  surface  diminished,  but  as  1  ransfers  are  almost  always  upstream 
the  waste  encountered  by  traversing  a  broad,  sandy  river  bed  to  the 
lower  head  gates  is  eliminated  entirely. 

Section  3  of  the  act  quoted  above  was  the  most  discussed  and  the 
most  highly  praised  or  bitterly  condemned  of  any  law  ever  passed 
relative  to  irrigation,  and  its  praise  or  blame  rested  on  whether  the 
individual  was  benefited  or  conceived  himself  to  have  been  hurt. 
That  the  law  in  its  practical  application  both  benefited  and  hurt  irriga- 
tion there  can  be  no  doubt;  but  it  was  in  the  interpretation  of  the  law 
by  the  different  commissioners  and  superintendents  that  the  benefit  or 
harm  lay.  The  section  was  intended  to  sanction  the  exchange  and 
prorating  of  water  in  times  of  emergency  and  to  enable  a  ditch  of  late 
priority  to  obtain  water  late  in  the  irrigating  season  for  the  preserva- 
tion of  orchards  and  small  fruits  and  for  domestic  use.  where  it  would 
require  only  throe  or  four  days'  run  to  give  the  orchards  or  other 
crops  an  irrigation  that  would  probably  last  them  the  rest  of  the  sea- 
son. It  was  also  deemed  proper  and  desirable  where  a  ditch  had  a 
small  but  early  priority,  not  sufficient  to  reach  the  end  of  the  ditch  on 
account  of  loss  by  seepage  and  evaporation  that  it  should  be  permitted 
to  agree  with  another  ditch  in  similar  circumstances  to  loan  its  water 
for  a  short  time  to  such  other  ditch,  and  in  return  should  receive  the 
water  of  that  ditch  for  a  like  time,  and  each  could  with  combined  heads 
force  the  water  to  the  end  of  the  ditch. 

The  law  sanctions  the  exchange  of  water  between  ditches  and  reser- 
voirs. It  is  very  often  impracticable  for  a  ditch  company  to  have  its 
reservoirs  so  located  that  the  stored  water  is  available  for  use  on  its 
land.  If,  however,  it  is  allowable  for  it  to  give  its  stored  water  to  a 
ditch  lower  on  the  stream  and  receive  at  its  head  gates  water  from  the 
river  on  that  ditch's  priority,  a  distinct  gain  results.  Also,  reservoir 
construction  is  encouraged  and  no  one  is  injured,  as  the  amount  of 
water  diverted  at  the  time  of  exchange  is  not  increased. 

The  commissioners  and  the  superintendent  of  one  division  gave  the 
most  liberal  interpretation  to  the  law.  They  decided  that  as  the  law 
read  "the  water  commission  shall  recognize  tin4  same"  (notice  of 
agreement  of  exchange)  in  his  distribution  of  water,  they  had  no 
discretion  in  the  matter,  and  as  a  consequence  transfers  were  made 
whenever  and  however  best  suited  the  contracting  parties.  It  is  more 
than  suspected  that  actual  sales  of  water  were  made  by  some  parties 
having  old  priorities.  The  effect  of  such  a  proceeding  is  readily  seen; 
priorities  were  practically  suspended  and  decrees  nullified;  ditch  No. 
1  "  loaning"  water  it  could  not  use  to  ditch  No.  3  deprived  ditch  No.  2 
of  water  which  would  otherwise  have  been  in  the  river  and  available 
for  the  filling  of  decrees.  Crops  were  not  only  t;  saved/'  as  allowed 
by  the  law,  but  planted,  grown,  and  matured  on  "borrowed"  water. 
Under  so  liberal  a  ruling,  the  management  of  a  ditch  could  deprive  the 


61 

consumers  thereunder  of  water  they  actually  needed.  Thej  would 
probably  not  have  the  assurance  to  cause  any  loss  of  crops,  but  they 
could  considerably  inconvenience  and  embarrass  the  users  and  sell  the 
surplus  to  some  needy  canal.  For  some  unaccountable  reason  and 
contrary  to  all  previous  practice,  ili<'  pitches  injuriously  affected 
accepted  this  interpretation  and  suffered  in  Spartan  silence  so  tar  as 
appeal  for  redress  to  either  the  Mate  engineeror  the  courts  were  con- 
cerned. In  another  division  the  superintendent  assumed  an  exactly 
opposite  position,  and  ordered  his  commissioners  to  recognize  no  notices 
of  transfer.  The  courts  have  not  been  able  to  pass  on  tin-  const  itution- 
alitv  of  the  act.  and  it  seems  that  this  superintendent  was  equally  in 
error  with  the  one  already  mentioned..0  The  three  other  superintend- 
ents who  had  occasion  to  pass  upon  the  law  agreed  that  in  its  workings 
it  was  of  the  greatest  benefit  in  the  saving  of  crops  and  in  the  eco- 
nomical use  of  water.  As  no  complaints  were  made  of  the  exchanges 
in  these  divisions,  we  may  assume  that  the  user-  were  pleaded  with  the 
section. 

Some  law  is  necessary,  so  long  as  human  nature  is  as  it  is,  to  enable 
those  in  authority  to  prevent  the  selfish  from  playing  the  "dog  in  the 
manger."  To  he  sure,  there  is  a  law  prohibiting  waste,  hut  it  is  not 
to  the  public  interest  for  a  man  to  use  water  to  irrigate  stubble  land 
to  bring  up  wild  oats,  or  to  wet  the  land  for  the  next  season's  plow- 
ing when  an  orchard,  the  result  of  years  of  labor,  is  in  danger  of 
being  ruined:  and  if  a  man  in  a  neighborly  spirit  sees  lit  to  abandon 
his  third  crop  of  alfalfa  and  loan  his  water  for  the  purpose  of  saving 
crops,  it  is  public  policy  to  allow  him  to  do  so.  The  law  properly 
interpreted  and  executed  can  he  of  great  benefit  and  at  the  same  time 
not  interfere  with  vested  rights.  If  the  conditions  recited  in  the  sec- 
tion are  adhered  to.  and  if  the  broad  principle  of  noninterference  with 
the  rights  of  others  is  kept  in  mind,  no  one  can  object:  to  get  any  ben- 
efit, however,  from  the  law  one  must  he  just  and  reasonable  in  deter- 
mining the  rights  of  others.  Theoretical  and  inconsequent  damage 
should  not  be  allowed  to  prevent  the  good  which  might  be  done. 

The  condition  specifically  stated  in  the  section  that  the  loan  is  made 
for  the  purpose  of  saving  crop-  should  be  rigidly  adhered  to.  The 
loan  is  not  for  the  purpose  of  making  crops,  but  for  saving  those 
already  practically  matured.  To  he  saved  an  article  must  necessarily 
be  in  existence.  As  already  pointed  out.  the  exchange  may  result  in 
a  great  saving  of  water,  and  when  a  loan  or  exchange  i-  made,  if  it  is 
a  loan  or  exchange  contemplating  a  return  in  like  amount,  gifts  and 
sales  of  water  are  excluded.  Again,  the  loan  is  for  a  limited  time. 
This  clause  is,  I  admit,  indefinite,  and  might  be  expressed  more  clearly 

a  The  supreme  court  of  the  State  has  recently  upheld  the  constitutionality  of  the 

art.  New  Cache  la  Poudre  Irrigating  Company  u.  Water  Supply  and  Storage  Com- 
pany, 08  Pac.,  781. — Ed. 


62 

by  saying  for  one  irrigation;  and  such  an  interpretation  of  "a  limited 
time"  is  veryproper;  anything  less  would  be  nothing;  any  thing  more 

would  l>e  precluded  by  the  clause  "for  the  purpose  of  saving  crops." 
When  more  than  one  irrigation  is  needed  to  save  a  crop,  then  that 
crop  is  not  sufficiently  advanced  to  be  considered  as  in  existence,  or 
rather  to  have  value  sufficient  to  justify  the  upsetting  of  the  status  of 

the  river  to  save  it. 

It  would  not  be  wise  to  repeal  the  law.  as  was  attempted  during  the 
last  session  of  the  Legislature,  hut  it  should  he  so  amended  as  to  make 
it  more  definite  in  its  phraseology;  hut  any  such  law  must  of  neces- 
sity depend  for  its  beneficial  application  upon  the  good  judgment  of 
the  water  officials. 

The  laws  passed  by  the  legislature  of  1901  were,  one  by  Senator 
Clayton,  providing  penalties  for  not  maintaining  good  head  gates  and 
rating  Humes,  the  penalty  being  that  the  water  could  be  shut  out  until 
the  law  was  complied  with.  It  also  prohibits  the  storing  of  water 
when  the  same  is  required  for  direct  irrigation.  This  section  is  hardly 
applicable  as  between  reservoirs  with  rights  senior  to  the  ditches  using 
the  water  direct.  If  the  owners  of  a  reservoir  of  old  priority  have 
enjoyed  its  use  for  years,  it  is  unreasonable  to  suppose  that  a  recent 
diteh  can  interfere  with  that  use.  The  act  further  provides  that  reser- 
voirs situated  on  the  bed  of  a  stream  through  which  a  natural  flow 
passes  must  have  a  survey  made  and  its  contour  lines  run.  and  must 
place  a  gauge  rod  therein  to  mark  the  depth  of  water  in  the  reservoir. 

The  second  act  provides  that  any  interference  with  head  gates  or 
measuring  boxes  is  a  misdemeanor,  "and  that  any  person  who  shall 
be  found  using  water  taken  through  any  such  head  gate  so  unlawfully 
interfered  with  shall  prima  facie  he  deemed  guilty."  This  law  makes 
it  possible  to  convict  water  thieves  without  having  to  catch  them  in 
the  act  of  tampering  with  the  head  gates.  Heretofore  convictions 
have  been  few,  because  it  was  often  impossible  to  prove  who  individ- 
ually committed  the  act  of  raising  the  head  gate.  In  its  operation  it 
should  be  a  good  law. 

The  third  law  provides  for  the  formation  of  irrigation  districts, 
methods  of  holding  elections,  issuing  bonds,  etc.  The  law  has  had  no 
test  as  yet.  and  no  criticism  of  its  effects,  therefore,  can  be  made. 

LITIGATION. 

On  the  Big  Thompson  nearly  all  the  litigation  has  been  by  parties 
on  the  north  side  of  the  river  against  those  on  the  south  side.  The 
Loudon  and  the  Loveland  and  Greeley  companies  joined  interests 
against  the  Handy  and  the  Home  Supply  companies,  the  other  and 
smaller  ditches  being  drawn  into  the  controversy. 

In  the  descriptions  of  the  ditches  attention  has  been  called  to  some 


63 

Of    the    peculiarities   of    the   decree's,  and    in    the    table    below  are   8UD1- 

marized  the  findings  and  decrees.  The  wide  divergence  between  the 
quantities  of  water  granted  and  the  capacities  of  the  canals  and  need. 

of   the    land    has   been    responsible    for  nearly  all    the    litigation.      The 

first  table  is  a  summary  of  the  report  of  the  referee  appointed  to  take 
testimony  and  report  findings  upon  which  the  court  should  render  its 
decree.      The  second  table  is  the  decree  of   the  eourt  supposedly   based 

on  the  report  of  the  referee. 

Claims  jrresented  to  f</<r><  and  his  findings  <>u  which  <h<-rt>  bythejudg<  was  rendered. 


Name  of  ditch 


Width. 


Bottom.    Top 


BigThompson.No.la 
Big    Thompson    and 

M  a  n  u  fact  urin  g 

Cn.'s  Ditch 

Do 

Do 

Do 

Mariano  c 

Fanners'  Irrigating^ 

Do.d 

Do./ 

Big  Thompson  Irri- 
gating/   

Lovcland  and  Gree- 
ley?   

Lovcland  and  Gree- 
ley branch* 

bo 

Do.'  

Lovcland  and  Gree- 
ley/  

Lovcland  and  Gree- 
ley branch* 

Do./  

Lovcland  and  Gree- 
ley  

Big  '1  hompson  ami 
Platte  River 

Do.'" 

Rist  and  Ooss 

Do." 

Hill  and  Brush 

London 

Do 

George  Risto 

Do 

Hillsboro 

Do./' 

Do 

Handy 

I  )o 

South  Side"/ 

Home  Supply I 


Feet. 

10 


6 

s 
S 
I 

•  15.1 

■  IV  1 
'■15.1 


4. 
9 

3 

<  t; 
10 

I 

12 

11 
11 

•  16 

<  it;. 

•  18 


Feet. 
M 


li 
5 


Length 


15 

18 

is 
18 


Miles. 

s 


2.  2S 
1.5 


15 


1.5 
15 
15 

15 

3 


2.  75 

3.5 
3.5 


26.  5 


i 
1 
1 

4.7 
:-;.  7 
19.5 

2.  3 
12.3 
19.3 
21.5 

21 . 5 
9 

26 


Depth. 


Feet. 

3 


1 

2.  5 

2 
3 
0.  2 

3.  2 

3.2 
3.2 


1 
2 
2 

2.5 

2.5 


2 
2.  5 

: 

2.  5 

2.  5 

1.5 

3 

3.5 

3.5 

1.3 

2.7 

3 

2.  6 

4 

2 

4 


Kail  per 
milt 


No.  of 


Amount  Am. unit 


Feet. 

7 


25 
25 
25 
25 
8.92 

10 


'.v.'/5'  decreed.lclaimed, 
ity. 


6.7 
6.7 

5 
5 

2.  1 
5 

4.  2 
1.2 

2.  5 

4 

1 
3.2 


Cu./t. 

P<  /•  8<  C. 

1         96. 50 


34.20 
37.10 

65.  17 

9 
38.  11 

:».  72 

2.  (JO 

54.08 

7s 

18.56 


1.5  7  8.36         18.36 

2  13  a       12. GO 

2  17         39.40         39.40 


Ou.ft. 

perseC. 
96.50 


37.  U) 

II.  '.Ml 

90.86 

3.12 

:..  72 

•_'.  86 
62.40 


l.s.56 


21| 


18 


31 

9 

29 

11 
18 

• 

21 
21 
25 
in 
:.l 
39 

17 


19.92         19.93 


:::>.  50 
15.  20 


35.50 

15.  20 


Under 

ditch. 


Acres. 
2,640 


920 
1,320 

2.  isti 

2,180 


Irriga- 
ted. 


Acres. 

2,500 


400 
1,000 
1,600 
1,500 

120 
2,  100 
2,100 
2,100 

1,000 


4,300 
4,300 
4,300 

1,000 

3,600 


3,250  250 

690  690 

690  690 


3,600 

1,400 
2, 100 


35 

st',.  is 
6.  11 

st  i.  (17 

61.80 

40 

154.30 
195 
195 

'.•-.».  l". 

15.  69 

31.20 

141.23 

27-.  s  | 


35 

86.18 
10.50 
80.07 

10 
158.80 

195 

195 

inn 
■526" 

"  I'V" 


3,000 
3,000 

too 

inn 
1,600 

1:;.  in.; 

1.;.  in;; 
3,500 
3,500 
300 
6.000 
6,000 

in. 000 

]IMMH. 

1,500 
15,000 


560 


1,  ino 
1,800 


297.  11        528  30.000        1.000 


1,500 
2,000 

1  . 

225 

1,500 


100 
2,  lint 

300 
1,800 
3,000 
1,000 
7,000 

600 
1 1 .  521 ' 


n 0.026  cubic  fool     L  inch. 

bFoll  capacity. 

'■Not  sufficient  data  to  render  a  decree. 

d  All  in  one  application. 
e Average  width. 
/Capacity  103  cubic  feet. 
g  Barnes  Ditch. 

>'7.s  feet  recommended  by  referee. 
'12.6  recommended  by  referee— branch  Lovcland 
and  Greeley. 


/Barnes  Ditch. 

A17.3  recommended  by  referee. 
/9. 1  cubic  feel  recommended  by  referee, 
m Capacity  78  cubic  feet. 
"  Amount  carried  1. 7  cubic  feet. 
"Am. .nut  carried  121  cubic  feet. 
/'Amount  carried  71  feet. 
•i  Amount  carried  15.  6  feet. 


C>4 


Statement  of  prioritt 


)f  ih,  ditches  ni  null  r  district  No.  i  from  the  <i<  <■,■<<*  of  tin  district 

court. 


Name 


►f  ditch,  ci 
reservoir. 


Streams  from 
which  water  is 

taken. 


Hit,'  Thompson  Ditch 

Big  Thompson  ami  Manu- 
facturing Co.'s  Ditch. 

Mariano  Ditch 

Big  Thompson  ami  Manu- 
facturing Co.'s  Ditch, 
first  enlargement. 

Farmers'  [rrigating  Canal  . 

Big  Thompson  Irrigating 
Ditch. 

Loveland  and  Greeley  Ca- 
nal. 

Loveland  and  Greeley  Ca- 
nal (branch  |. 

Big  Thompson  and  l'lattc 
River  Ditch. 

Kist  and  Ooss  Ditch 

Hill  and  Brush  Ditch 


Date  of  appro- 
priation. 


Big  Thompson  ..    Nov.  10, 1861 
do \pr.      1,1863 


..do.. 
..do.. 


do 

do 


.do 


May     1,1863 
May     1,1864 


do 

Feb.  25, 1865 

Oct.    20,1865 

Nov.    J.  1st,;, 

Nov.  18,1865 

Mar.  20.1866 


Big  Thompson  and  Manu- 
facturing Co.' sl>i  tch,  sec- 
ond enlargement. 

Loveland  and  Greeley  Ca- 
nal, first  enlargement. 

Farmers'  [rrigating Canal, 
first  enlargement. 

Loveland  and  Greeley  Ca- 
nal, second  enlargement. 

Loudon  Irrigating  Canal  .. 

Big  Thompson  and  Manu- 
facturing Co.'s  Ditch, 
third  enlargement 

George  Rist  Ditch 

Loveland  ami  Greeley  Ca- 
nal, third  enlargement. 

Loveland  and  Greeley  Ca- 
nal, fourth  enlargement. 

Kirchner  Ditch 

Perkins  Ditch 

IIillsln.ro  Ditch 

Kist  and  Gosa  Ditch 

Big  Thompson  and  Platte 
River  Ditch, first  enlarge- 
ment. 

Loudon  Irrigating  Canal, 
lirst  enlargement. 

Handy  Ditch 

Hillsboro  Ditch,  first  en- 
largement. 

Farmers  Irrigating  Canal, 
second  enlargement. 

Loveland  and  Greeley  Ca- 
nal, tilth  enlargement. 

South  Side  Ditch 

Handy  Ditch,  first  enlarge- 
ment. 

Loveland  and  Greeley  Ca- 
nal, sixth  enlargement. 

Perkins  Ditch,  second  en- 
largement 

Home  Supply  Ditch 

Hillsboro  Ditch  second  en- 
largement. 

Loudon  Irrigating  Canal, 
second  enlargement. 


do I unc  30,  L866 

do Mar.     1,1867 


.do 


do... 

do... 


Buckhom  Creek. 
....do 

Big  Thompson... 

do 

....do 


.do 


do 

do 


.do 
.do 


do.... 

Buckhom 


Big  Thompson.. 

do 

....do 


net.    25,1873 

June  1,1874 
June  15,1874 
Oct.  15,1874 
Apr.  15,1875 
May  15,1876 


Nov.     1,187* 


Feb.   28, 
Apr.   15, 


Aug. 
Nov. 


Nov.     7. 
Dec.   15, 


Apr.     1, 
June    9, 


July   15, 

Oct.        (i, 


Sept.  it.  1883 


Amount 
decreed. 


sum  de- 
creed to 
each 

ditch, 
canal,  or 
resei  voir. 


Cu.ft. 
pt  r  sec. 
96.50 
34. 02 

3.12 
37.01 


78 

18.56 

8.36 

35 

6.41 
61.80 
65.  17 


June    1,1861 


.do June     1, 1868 

.do Oct.    20,1870 


.    Oct.      1,1871 
.    May     1,1872 


.do May     1,1873 

.do June  23.1873 


l^Ts 
1878 


1878 

1878 


1880 
1880 


1881 
L881 


1881 
L881 


6.81 

2.60 

8.  25 

80.07 

86.18 


154.; 


31.20 
99.  16 


54.08 

15. 20 


50.  30 
141.23 


297.  1 1 

4.  17 


278.  8  I 
1.-..  69 


123.  18 


Cii.JI. 

P<  r  »  c. 


"1.03 


136.  50 


317.78 


Water 

previ- 


12.06  38.98 

2.60  8.32 

39.04  78.02 

40  


146.  25 


195 
19.  93 


35.  50         133.  45 


86.  is 
121.18 


194.30 


107.71 

62.  in 

1 18.  65 


172.  13 
4  16.  i  9 


propri- 
ated  in 
district. 

in  dis- 
trict. 

<ii.ft. 
P'  /•  »  C. 
3.12 
99.  62 

1 
2 

133.64 
136.76 

3 
4 

17;;.  77 
179.  19 

5 

6 

257.  19 

7 

276.  05 

8 

284.  11 

9 

819.  11 
332.06 
393.  86 

10 

12 
13 

17-.-:; 

15 

192.06 

17 

526.17 

21 

565.  21 
608.67 

22 

24 

618.42 

813.  42 

25 
26 

833.35 

27 

904.65 

1,048.95 

28 
29 
30 
33 
37 

1,190.25 

40 

1,344.55 
1 ,  375. 75 

41 
42 

1.  175.21 

43 

1 ,  529.  29 

44 

1,586.28 
1,636.58 

49 
50 

1,777.81 

51 

2,075.25 

52 

2,079.72 

53 
54 

2,  104.25 

55 

NOTE.— The  rights  to  water  from  Little  Thompson  Creek,   which  were  included  in  the  original 
decree,  arc  omitted  in  this  table, 


65 


Stab  nn  nt  of  pri 


f  reservoirs  in  ivater  district  Xo. 
court. 


front  tin   <i<  en  •  ■-■  of  tl"  district 


Nam.-  of  resen  oir. 


Stream  from  which  water  i- 
taken. 


:  appn 
prlation. 


Amount  <»f 
appropria- 


Order  of 
priority 
in  dis- 
trict. 


Risl 

Mariano  . . 

Bennetts. . 
Big  Thomp 
Farwell... 


Big  Thompson Sept.  15,1874 

do Oct      1,1875 

st. \' rain  and  Little  Thompson    Feb.  25,1880 

n Big  Thompson May   18,1881 

<!<> Vug.  31,1881 

Feb.  24,1883 


Luii«l<»n do 


Cubic  feet 

fH ;'  St  mini. 

5,211 
180,  » 
1,267,800 
14,001 

H0.00ii.ikmi 

10, 


Examination  will  show  there  was  apparently  no  rule  adopted  by  the 
judge  or  referee  for  estimating  the  amount  of  water  the  ditches  car- 
ried or  the  amount  of  water  necessary  to  irrigate  an  acre  of  land. 
The  judge  has  in  some  cases  followed  the  referee's  recommendation  and 
in  other-  ignored  it.  The  referee,  in  turn,  generally  accepted  as  cor- 
rect the  statements  of  the  claimants,  but  in  others  he  did  not.  though 
there  appears  to  be  no  reason  for  the  distinctions.  In  some  cases  he 
allowed  an  amount  sufficient  to  irrigate  all  the  land  under  the  ditch; 
in  others  he  confined  the  amount  to  the  land  actually  irrigated.  In 
some  he  allowed  water  for  land  which  by  an  extension  and  enlarge- 
ment of  the  ditch  might  be  irrigated.  h\  one  case  at  least  he  allowed 
water  to  only  the  land  actually  irrigated,  ignoring  the  fact  that  the 
ditch  for  nearly  its  entire  length  could  carry  a  yolume  sufficient  for 
all  the  land  under  it.  that  work  was  rapidly  prosecuted,  and  that  this 
land  was  irrigated  at  the  earliest  practicable  date.  In  this  case  he  did 
not  take  into  consideration  the  extent  and  difficulty  of  construction, 
but  diyided  the  decree  into  several  parts,  each  of  date  when  water  was 
actually  applied  without  reference  to  the  time  of  beginning  construc- 
tion. In  another  case,  contrary  to  the  statements  made  in  the  applica- 
tion and  request  for  two  decrees  of  different  dates,  he  granted  one 
decree  aggregating  in  amount  the  total  of  the  two  and  of  date  of  the 
older. 

FIRST  SERIES  OF  CONTESTS. 

The  Handy  Ditch,  intended  and  located  to  cover  nearly  all  the  land 
on  the  south  side,  is  by  the  decree  granted  a  flow  of  31.2  cubic  feet 
per  second  to  irrigate  15,000  acres  of  land.  The  priority  of  the  bal- 
ance, 141.23  cubic  feet  per  second,  was  dated  three  year-  later,  as  the 
company  had  not  been  able  to  begin  and  complete  a  ditch  capable  of 
carrying  the  total  amount  through  its  entire  proposed  length  the  first 
year  after  work  was  begun.  This  action  allowed  260  cubic  feet  per 
second  for  various  ditches  and  enlargements  to  intervene  between  the 
two  priorities. 

The  officers  of  the  Handy  Ditch,  ignorant  that  the  referee  had  taken 
it  upon  himself  to  divide  their  decree  without  notice  to  them,  and, 
2817— No.  118—02 5 


66 

being  unaffected  thereby  on  account  of  tin-  abundance  of  water  in  the 
river  and  the  small  amount  withdrawn  by  the  older  priorities,  allowed 
nearly  the  full  four  years  within  which  an  appeal  from  the  decree 
could  be  made  to  lapse.  The  decree  was  granted  May  28,  ls^».  and 
not  until  the  fall  of  L886  did  the  water  commissioner  find  it  necessary 
to  turn  water  from  the  Bandy  Ditch  to  till  decree-  between  the  two 
date-  <>f  the  decrees  of  the  Handy  Ditch.  Investigation  disclosed  the 
true  state  of  things,  and  suit  was  immediately  brought  by  the  Handy 
Company  to  set  aside  the  decree-:  brought,  however,  in  the  district 
court  of  Larimer  County.  Thus  in  its  effort  to  save  its  right,  the 
Handy  Company  precipitated,  in  the  spring  of  L887,  a  legal  contest 
not  yet  ended.  The  case  was  entitled  "The  Loudon  Irrigation  and 
Canal  Co.  et  al.  v.  The  Handy  Ditch  Co.  et  al."     (22  Colo.,  p.  102.) 

The  suit  was  originally  brought  in  the  district  court  of  Larimer 
County  and  in  eti'ect  was  an  attempt  to  set  aside  the  decrees  for  the 
entire  district.  The  Handy  Company,  believing  that  the  decree-  of 
the  older  ditches  were  excessive  and  that  they  were  entitled  to  have 
their  entire  decree  of  one  date — the  date  of  the  beginning  of  construc- 
tion— instead  of  two  dates,  sought  relief  by  the  above  action. 

The  defendants  (The  Loudon  et  al.)  denied  the  jurisdiction  of  the 
Larimer  County  court  and  alleged  insufficient  cause  of  action,  which 
latter  contention  the  court  upheld,  but  claimed  jurisdiction.  Upon 
appeal  to  the  supreme  court,  that  tribunal  reversed  the  lower  court 
in  the  matter  of  jurisdiction,  sustaining  the  law  of  187i».  section  19, 
which  gave  exclusive  jurisdiction  to  the  court  where  the  decrees  were 
first  rendered,  which  in  the  case  of  district  No.  -i  was  the  Boulder 
County  district  court.  The  case  does  not  touch  the  point  whether  one 
district  can  reopen  the  decrees  of  another  district  after  four  years  have 
elapsed.  It  simply  says  that  any  action  growing  out  of  the  decrees 
must  be  tried  before  the  court  which  rendered  the  decrees  and  within 
four  year-  of  the  date  of  such  decrees. 

The  effect  of  the  decision  is  to  establish  more  firmly  the  validity  of 
a  decree.  If  at  any  time  after  four  year-  an  adjudication  could  be  opened 
up,  and  especially  if  before  another  court,  the  adjudication  would  be 
of  slight  avail,  and  title  to  water  could  not  be  finally  and  firmly  settled. 
When  it  is  remembered  that  months  and  years  of  labor  have  been 
spent  in  arriving  at  a  decision,  it  would  be  folly  to  allow  the  work  to 
be  a  subject  of  question  for  all  time.  It  would  be  eminently  proper 
to  allow  a  certain  time  to  elapse  to  test  the  practical  workings  of  the 
decrees  before  making  them  unassailable;  but.  very  properly,  there 
should  come  a  time  when  decrees  are  established  beyond  the  possibility 
of  question. 

Upon  being  remanded,  some  new  points  were  brought  out.  and  so 
the  case  reached  the  supreme  court  a  second  time  under  the  title  of 
••The  Handy  Ditch  Co.  /•.  The  South  Side  Ditch  Co.  et.  al."  (26  Colo., 
p.  333.) 


67 

En  this  second  triaU  before  the  Larimer  County  court  the  Handy 
Company  still  contended  thai  thai  courl  had  jurisdiction  and  showed 
that,  acting  under  the  law  of  ls7'.».  proceedings  were  begun  in  that 
court  by  the  appointment  of  a  referee  and  the  taking  of  considerable 
evidence  prior  to  the  institution  of  proceedings  under  the  law  of  L881 
by  tin1  Boulder  County  court.  On  this  point,  however,  tin-  Larimer 
County  court  held,  in  view  of  the  decision  of  the  supreme  courl  in  the 
previous  case,  that  the  Handy  Company,  being  a  party  to  the  ]  >n><  •<•«■.  I- 
ings  before  the  courl  of  Boulder  County  and  having  acquiesced  in 
the  same,  were  bound  by  it<  decrees.  'The  supreme  court  affirmed  the 
decision  of  the  lower  court,  and  the  four  years  having  elapsed  within 
which  to  begin  proceedings  before  the  Boulder  court,  this  phase  of  the 
case  ended. 

SECOND  SERIES  OF  CONTESTS. 

In  the  meantime,  however,  the  Handy  Company,  anticipating  the 
adverse  decision,  sought  to  remedy  their  misfortune  by  taking  advan- 
tage  of  the  condition  of  the  decrees  and  to  turn  to  their  benefit  what 
had  been  an  injustice  to  them.  They  therefore  purchased,  an  old  ditch 
and  the  land  under  it.  abandoned  the  irrigation  of  the  land,  and  sought 
to  transfer  the  water.  This  proceeding  inaugurated  the  second  series 
of  contests,  the  interests  of  the  contestants,  however,  being  the  reverse 
of  that  in  the  first  series.  It  now  became  vital  for  the  Handy  Com- 
pany to  uphold  and  maintain  the  justice  and  validity  of  the  decrees 
and  for  the  north  side  ditches  practically  to  break  and  set  aside  the 
decree-. 

The  Handy  Company,  in  view  of  the  court  decisions  in  the  first 
cases,  had  rather  the  better  of  the  situation,  while  its  adversaries  were 
in  something  of  a  dilemma  from  this  cause.  They,  however,  avoided 
the  real  issue  by  admitting  the  correctness  and  validity  of  thedecrees, 
but  contended  that  immediately  after  and  ever  since  the  decree  was 
issued  the  use  of  the  water  had  been  abandoned  in  whole  or  in  part: 
that  the  area  irrigated  was  small,  and  on  account  of  increasing  seepage 
had  constantly  grown  less  since  the  time  of  the  decree.  Much  evidence 
was  introduced  by  both  sides  to  -how  the  amount  of  water  required 
for  such  lands.  The  evidence  introduced  by  the  Handy  Company  was 
very  similar  to  that  given  before  the  referee  when  the  decrees  were 
rendered,  not  only  in  regard  to  the  ditch  in  question,  but  for  the  very 
ditches  constituting  the  opposition. 

The  evidence  of  the  opposition  was  in  direct  and  glaring  contrast  to 
that  given  by  them  in  obtaining  decrees,  and  the  only  reason  it  did  not 
react  on  themselves  was  that  sine*1  the  adjudication  they  had  so  enlarged 
their  canals  and  so  extended  the  use  of  the  water  that  the  full  amount 
decreed  was  in  time  used.  On  the  other  hand,  there  was  no  enlarge- 
ment or  extended  use  of  the  ditch  in  question. 


68 

The  case  coming  on  appeal  by  both  the  defendants  and  plaintiffs  to  the 
supreme  court  is  known  a-  "The  Handy  Ditch  Co.  y.  The  Loudon  Irri- 
gating Canal  Co."  (62  Pacific  Reporter).  The  facts  in  the  case  were. 
The  Handy  Ditch  Company  purchased  the  Big  Thompson  Irrigating 

Ditch  and  the  lands  under  it,  some  800 acres, abandoned  the  latter,  and 
applied  to  the  superintendent  of  irrigation  to  transfer  the  water  to  the 

Handy  Ditch  some  L0  miles  above  the  head  gate  of  the  old  ditch.  The 
amount  of  the  decree  was  78  cubic  feel  per  second,  dated  February  25, 
L865,  being  the  fifth  decree  in  the  district,  and  commonly  known  as 
••  No.  5  ditch."  The  superintendent  allowed  but  40  cubic  feet  per  sec- 
ond to  be  transferred,  as  he  contended  that  the  old  ditch  could  not  carry 
much  more  than  one-half  of  its  decree.  On  appeal  to  the  State  engi- 
neer he  caused  the  ditch  to  he  measured  and  levels  run.  from  which 
the  estimated  capacity  was  shown  to  be  from  100  to  150  cubic  feet  per 
second.  He  therefore  ordered  the  full  amount  to  be  transferred.  In 
the  meantime,  however,  the  north-side  ditches  had  brought  suit,  as 
stated,  in  the  Larimer  County  court,  which  court  held  that  the  evi- 
dence showed  that  not  more  than  20  of  the  7^  cubic  feet  per  second 
had  been  used  of  late  years.  It  excluded  evidence  which  tended  to 
show  that  much  or  all  of  the  20  cubic  feet  per  second  used  was  seepage 
and  return  water  which  entered  the  river  between  the  old  and  new 
points  of  diversion,  upholding-  the  argument  of  the  Handy  Company 
that  the  decree  was  not  for  water  which  might,  at  some  date  subse- 
quent to  the  date  of  the  decree,  have  found  its  way  back  to  the  river, 
but  for  that  which  constituted  part  of  the  original  supply  in  the  stream. 

In  its  appeal  to  the  supreme  court  the  Handy  Company  urged  that 
the  finding  was  in  error,  in  that  the  evidence  did  not  warrant  the 
reduction  from  78  to  20  cubic  feet  per  second,  and  that  the  court  erred 
in  not  admitting  evidence  as  to  the  size  and  capacity  of  the  ditch.  The 
defendants  appealed  on  the  ground  that  evidence  was  excluded  which 
would  have  shown  that  whatever  water  had  been  used  by  "No.  5 " 
ditch  was  water  which  entered  the  river  as  seepage  below  the  head  gate 
of  the  Handy  Ditch,  and  if  any  water  was  transferred  that  it  would  be 
withdrawn  from  the  original  supply  in  the  stream,  and  the  use  of  which 
they  theretofore  had  enjoyed. 

The  supreme  court  affirmed  the  decision  of  the  lower  court  so  far 
as  it  related  to  the  amount  of  water  used  by  the  "No.  5*'  ditch,  but 
remanded  the  case  w  ith  instructions  that  if  a  new  trial  was  had  it  should 
embrace  only  the  question  of  whether  the  20  feet  found  to  have  been 
used  by  *'  No.  5"  ditch  was  in  whole  or  in  part  seepage  water  and  not 
available  for  the  tilling  of  decrees  of  the  Loudon  or  other  older  ditches. 

The  decision  of  the  supreme  court  will  probably  stand,  namely,  that 
20  of  the  78  cubic  feet  decreed  to  the  "No.  5"  ditch  will  be  transferred 
to  the  Handy.  With  the  final  determination  of  this  suit  the  litigation 
will  end,  though  in  the  district  court  at  present  are  some  six  suits  in 


69 

which  the  north  Bide  ditches  are  seeking  to  preveul  the  transfer  of 
water  from  the  Big  Thompson  Ditch  and  Manufacturing  Company's 
Ditch  and  the  Big  Thompson  No.  1  ditch  to  the  I  tandy,  I  Ionic  Supply, 
and  rlillsboro  ditches. 

The  suits  are  simply  a  continuation  of  the  efforts  of  the  south-side 
ditches  to  overcome  the  disastrous  effects  of  the  decrees  which  gave 
excessive  amounts  to  the  old  ditches,  allowing  enlargement  and  in- 
creased use  to  an  extent  which  has  seriously  affected  the  water  avail- 
able to  till  their  priorities. 

OTHER  LITIGATION. 

NEW  LOVELAND  AND  GBEELE1    I.AM)  AND  [RRIGATION  COMPANY    V.   HOME 

SUPPLY  COMPANY. 

[i)L)  Pacific  Reporter.] 

Both  parties  to  this  suit  own  large  and  valuable  reservoirs  under 
their  respective  canals — Lake  Loveland  under  the  Loveland  and  Gree- 
ley (anal  and  the  Mariano  and  Lone  Tree  reservoirs  under  the  Home 
Supply.  The  action  was  brought  in  the  district  court  of  Boulder 
County  to  establish  the  relative  right  of  priority  of  these  reservoirs. 

The  Loveland  and  Greeley  Ditch  priorities  as  decreed  are  prior  to 
those  of  the  Home  Supply.  The  relative  dates  of  construction  of  the 
reservoirs,  however,  are  reversed,  the  Home  Supply  reservoirs  being 
in  Inn:?  and  1889  and  the  Loveland  Lake  in  1893,  each  exercising  clue 
diligence  after  commencement  of  work  on  the  reservoirs  in  prosecut- 
ing the  same  to  completion. 

The  Loveland  and  Greeley  Company  claimed  the  right  under  it- 
ditch  decree  to  divert  the  amount  of  its  decree  at  any  time  and  for  any 
purpose  which  was  more  effective  or  economical;  that  is.  to  have  the 
right  to  store  water  during  the  nonirrigating  season  on  its  ditch  decree, 
the  reservoir  being  a  part  of  its  system  and  its  construction  contem- 
plated at  the  time  the  several  priorities  were  obtained,  though  it  did 
not  begin  construction  for  some  ten  years  after  the  decree  was  ren- 
dered fixing  the  ditch  priority  and  some  twenty-eight  years  after  the 
date  of  its  first  priority. 

The  Home  Supply  Company  claimed  that  its  reservoirs  were  con- 
structed and  in  operation  ten  and  four  years  prior  to  the  construction 
of  Lake  Loveland:  that  the  right  of  storage  attaches  when  the  actual 
work  of  construction  of  the  reservoir  is  begun  and  prosecuted  with 
due  diligence,  and  not  when  the  feeder  to  the  reservoir  was  begun, 
unless  the  two  are  closely  connected  in  point  of  time,  in  intention  and 
actual  construction. 

The  court  held  that  the  mere  intention  is  of  itself  insufficient  to  give 
a  vested  right,  but  must  be  manifested  by  the  completion  of  the  gen- 
eral plan  and  a  beneficial  use  within  a  reasonable  time. 


70 

The  Loveland  and  Greeley  Company  relied,  however,  mainly  on  its 
decree  fixing  the  priority  of  right  for  agricultural  purposes,  which 
"fairly  interpreted"  would  give  it  the  righl  to  store  water  in  reser- 
voirs it  might  thereafter  construct.  The  courl  says,  "There  are  two 
sufficient  replies  to  this  contention.  First,  il  was  not  within  the  juris- 
diction of  the  court  in  the  proceedings  leading  up  to  the  decree  to 
make  an  absolute  and  unconditional  decree  of  priority  for  a  reservoir 
not  then  begun  or  constructed,  and  in  the  second  place  the  decree 
itself  does  not  purport  to  do  so."  but  expressly  excludes  appliances 
not  then  in  existence.  In  such  cases  as  this  it  would  seem  unjust  that 
a  late  ditch  which  had  provided  itself  with  the  means  of  supplying  its 
deficient  early  rights  should,  after  the  enjoyment  of  that  means  for  a 
number  of  years,  be  subject  to  an  old  priority  seeking  to  enlarge  its 
diversion  of  water  from  the  stream  by  means  of  storage. 

I.OWKR    LATHAM    DITCH    COMPANY    /'.    LOUDON    IRRIGATING    CANAL    COM- 
PANY   ET   AL. 

[Pacific  Reporter  60,  p.  629.] 

This  suit  was  to  test  the  relative  rights  of  priority  in  two  districts 
dependent  on  each  other:  Whether  ditches  in  district  No.  4.  from  the 
Big  Thompson  River,  were  or  should  be  subject  to  the  rights  of  prior 
appropriation  below  on  the  Platte  River  in  district  Xo.  2. 

The  users  on  the  Big  Thompson  obtained  an  injunction  restraining 
the  water  commissioner  from  complying  with  the  order  of  his  superior, 
the  superintendent,  to  close  out  ditches  on  the  Big  Thompson  in  order 
to  supply  such  priorities  on  the  Platte  River  as  were  earlier  than  those 
on  the  Big  Thompson.  The  water  commissioner  notified  the  plaintiffs 
of  the  action  and  forwarded  to  them  his  notifications,  etc.,  expecting 
them  to  defend  their  rights.  They,  however,  allowed  the  case  to  go 
by  default,  but  subsequently  brought  the  present  action  to  compel  a 
recognition  of  their  older  rights. 

The  defendants  pleaded  that  while  the  plaintiffs  were  not  parties  to 
the  injunction  suit,  nevertheless  they  had  notice,  and  so  were  bound  by 
the  decree.  Also  that  for  a  number  of  years  the  ditches  on  the  Big- 
Thompson  had  used  the  water  now  asked  for  by  the  ditches  on  the 
Platte,  who,  with  a  knowledge  of  this,  had  nevertheless  allowed  the 
practice  to  continue  without  protest,  permitting  improvements  to  be 
made  in  district  No.  -i  under  the  belief  that  there  was  water  in  suffi- 
cient quantity  and  not  subject  to  the  priorities  below,  and  though  in 
need  of  the  water  to  fill  their  priorities  the  ditches  of  district  No.  2 
had  allowed  their  rights  to  lapse.  They  set  forth  also  that  even  should 
the  water  be  turned  out  of  the  Big  Thompson  ditches  to  fill  those  of 
the  Platte,  it  would  do  so  slowly  and  after  great  loss  in  volume. 

The  district  court  of  Larimer  County  sustained  these  positions,  which, 


71 

however,  the  supreme  court  reversed,  holding  that  the  plaintiffs  were 
not  parties  to  the  injunction  suit,  though  having  knowledge  of  the 
same,  and  thai  "  if  a  failure  of  one  diverting  watei  from  a  stream  to 
protest  every  time  a  shortage  in  his  supply  is  occasioned  by  another 
withdrawing  water  to  which  he  is  not  entitled  is  to  be  construed  as 
acquiescence  amounting  to  abandonment  priorities  would  be  of  little 
value."  Also  the  fact  that  a  considerable  loss  in  volume  would  occur 
through  evaporation  and  percolation  was  not  sufficient  reason  for 
depriving  the  lower  ditches  of  their  rights  of  priority. 

This  case  confirms  the  practice  and  belief  that  rights  on  tributaries 
and  on  the  main  stream,  though  in  different  districts  of  the  same  divi- 
sion, are  subject  to  prior  rights  pi  all  other  ditches  of  the  division. 

COMMENTS. 

Ln  looking  over  the  water  conditions  in  Colorado,  examining  the 
causes  of  the  legal  contests  and  difficulties  of  administration,  no  one 
thing  seems  to  be  entirely  responsible,  each  succeeding  cause  or  error 
depending  on  what  had  preceded  and  on  what  followed  to  produce  the 
full  measure  of  difficulties.  Each  mistake  seemingly  had  a  chance  of 
correction,  but,  instead  of  a  correction,  only  additional  errors  were 
made. 

First,  the  absence  of  records,  filings  of  statements  in  the  early  days 
was  a  had  beginning,  second,  the  laws  of  1879  and  1881  relative  to 
decrees  fell  short  of  their  intention  to  supply  the  deficiency  in  records; 
third,  the  adjudication  of  water  rights  failed  to  eliminate  the  errors 
made  possible  by  the  incompleteness  of  the  laws  of  1879  and  L881  and 
added  others;  fourth,  subsequent  litigation  perpetuated  and  exagger- 
ated these  errors. 

The  law  relative  to  filings  passed  in  1881  has  a  few  faults — namely, 
that  it  came  almost  twenty  years  too  late  to  do  much  good,  and  there 
is  no  provision  for  an  official  examination  and  acceptance  of  the  filing-. 
and  that  the  courts  have  held  it  to  be  unconstitutional  in  that  non- 
compliance therewith  can  not  deprive  an  appropriator  of  his  constitu- 
tional right  to  the  use  of  water. 

Filings  are  of  little  value  except  as  evidence  of  time  when  the  claim 
was  made  and  of  intention.  Filed  in  the  county  recorder's  office,  they 
are  not  indexed  with  reference  to  the  land  covered,  and  nowhere 
appear  in  the  abstracts  of  the  land.  There  is  no  method  in  use  for 
abstracting  water  rights,  and  it  is  impossible  to  determine  who  the 
owners  are  or  to  what  land  the  water  is  applied.  This  looseness  of 
the  record  of  ownership  of  decrees,  as  well  as  undecreed  ditches,  ha- 
led to  much  litigation.  Not  only  is  the  irrigator  constantly  threatened 
by  the  dangers  incident  to  water  supply  and  control,  but  is  sur- 
rounded by  an  atmosphere  of  doubt  as  to  the  exact  status  of  his  title 
and  the  rights  upon  which  the  success  or  failure  of  his  efforts  depend. 


72 

There  being  no  official  examination  and  acceptance  of  these  claims 

filed,  what  is  the  result  of  the  uncontrolled  and  indiscriminate  riling 4 
District  No.  4  has  suffered  little  from  filings  as  compared  with  other 
districts  since  adjudications  were  had.  On  page  47  is  a  summary  of  the 
filings  made  since  1887,  which  shows  claim  for  nearly  three  times  the 
average  flow  of  the  stream  for  ditches  alone,  and  for  reservoirs  of 
nearly  7,500,000,000  cubic  feet — more  than  the  entire  flow  in  the  river 
for  an  average  year.  In  addition  to  this,  it  must  be  remembered  that 
the  amount  of  water  actually  decreed  to  ditches  only  by  the  courts 
(see  table  of  decrees,  page  64),  and  which  are  prior  to  these  claim-,  is 
nearly  200  cubic  feet  per  second  in  excess  of  the  maximum  recorded 
flow  of  the  river  during  the  last  twelve  years  and  exceeds  the  average 
recorded  flow  for  the  month  of  June  by  1,657  cubic  feet  per  second. 
Now,  add  to  this  reservoir  decrees  to  the  extent  of  15,000  acre-feet. 
This  tendency  to  make  excessive  filings  and  claims  was  encouraged  by 
the  condition  of  the  decrees,  they  being,  as  indicated,  far  in  excess  of 
the  amount  available,  while,  in  point  of  fact,  after  the  old  ditches  were 
filled  there  remained  in  the  stream  and  subject  to  appropriation  con- 
siderable unused  water. 

It  was  very  unwise  in  the  beginning  not  to  have  some  control  and 
restriction  of  these  filings.  One  man  files  on  "all  the  surplus  and 
unappropriated  water"  without  doing  an}'  work  other  than  a  rough 
survey,  and,  too,  after  the  waters  have  been  filed  on  to  ten  times  the 
discharge  of  the  stream.  Another  files  on  "50,000  cubic  feet  per 
second,"  when  the  stream,  in  its  wildest  moments  of  storm,  melting 
snow,  and  cloudburst,  never  carried  one-tenth  that  amount;  and  there 
those  absurd  " filings"  stand  like  specters,  intimidating  bona  fide  set- 
tlers and  legitimate  corporate  enterprise  and  casting  doubt  upon  the 
title  to  water  of  existing  ditches. 

The  law  of  1881  was  intended  to  determine  the  rights  to  water  of 
different  claimants  and  to  fix  those  rights;  to  bring  to  a  stop,  as  it 
were,  the  old  order  of  things  and  to  start  a  new,  with  the  past  definitely 
settled  and  the  future  controlled.  The  records  to  this  time  depended 
on  the  memory  of  the  "oldest  inhabitant,"  who  was  passing  away. 
The  difficulties  of  a  just  determination  were  great,  but  their  impor- 
tance was  greater,  though  hardly  appreciated  by  either  the  claimants 
or  the  courts.  Each  appropriator  presented  his  claim,  and  his  neigh- 
bors and  friends  corroborated  his  statements.  Almost  never  was  any- 
one's claim  questioned  or  examined  by  others  interested.  The  only 
question  gone  into  with  any  thoroughness  was  the  date  of  priority; 
the  size,  length,  capacity,  and  location  were  mere  statements.  The 
acreage  to  be  irrigated,  while  generally  given,  was  guessed  at.  as  was 
the  amount  necessary  to  an  acre.  The  location  of  the  canal  and  the 
ownership  were  in  no  more  definite  form.  Especially  noticeable  was 
the  absence  of  any  State  control  or  any  effort  on  the  part  of  the  State 
to  protect  the  interests  of  those  who  were  to  come  after.     A  "cubic 


73 

foot  of  water  per  second"  had  do  meaning  to  -nine;  others  maintained 
thai  L2  "inches  "a  was  afoot:  others  still  thai  L  4.4  or  1,728  was  cor- 
rect. It  would  appear  from  the  results  thai  the  majority  favored  the 
12  inches  to  a  foot  idea,  resulting  in  decrees  three  times  what  was 
intended. 

It  is  strange  that  the  judge  or  referee,  who  presumably  knew  of  the 
conflict  of  opinion  and  of  the  wide  range  of  statements  relative  to  w  hat 
was  necessary  to  irrigate  an  acre  of  land  and  what  constituted  an 
'•inch."  did  not  avail  himself  of  the  services  of  a  competent  engineer, 
who  would  report  on  each  ditch,  classify  the  land  under  each,  estimate 
the  acreage,  measure  the  canal,  and  ascertain  its  capacity  and  the 
amount  it  probably  used.  The  expense  would  have  been  much  less 
than  the  witness  fees  or  the  time  value  of  the  gratuitous  witnesses. 

Had  we  at  that  time  bad  a  State  engineer  who,  without  bias  or  prej- 
udice, employing  the  same  methods  of  measurements  and  standards 
of  classification,  was  authorized  to  make  reports,  the  judge  would  have 
had  reliable,  uniform  data  on  which  to  base  his  decrees;  instead  of 
such  information  he  relied  on  the  statements  of  interested  parties,  who 
were  ignorant  alike  of  standards  or  methods  of  measurement.  During 
the  last  year  a  man  who  has  been  irrigating  for  at  least  thirty  years 
demanded  in  all  seriousness  and  good  faith  2,000  inches  of  water  for  a 
320-acre  farm.  About  200  inches  were  turned  into  his  ditch  and  he 
reported  that  he  was  getting  his  2,000  inches  all  right.  He  is  a  type 
of  the  witnesses  testifying  before  the  referee — honest  and  with  the 
best  of  intentions.  The  result  of  all  this  was,  naturally,  excessive 
decrees  and  indefinite  and  conflicting  terms,  as  in  the  decree  previously 
given.  The  peculiarities  of  the  decrees  in  district  No.  -I-  have  been 
discussed,  but  all  the  above  reasons  and  those  previously  mentioned 
do  not  explain,  nor  can  they  excuse  all  the  mistakes  made.  No  man. 
no  matter  how  good  a  judge  or  attorney,  is  competent  to  render 
decrees  unless  he  has  had  practical  experience  in  the  handling  and  dis- 
tribution of  water,  and  for  this  reason  it  seems  necessary  either  to 
remove  the  settling  of  priorities  from  the  judiciary  or  to  supply  them 
with  such  expert  aid  as  is  necessary. 

A  board  consisting  of  men  trained  in  the  service  who  recognize  its 
needs,  the  difficulties  and  dangers  likely  to  arise,  and  who  can  and  will 
make  examination  on  the  ground  to  settle  disputed  facts,  seems  far 
superior  to  a  judge  who  has  had  at  most  little  practical  experience  with 
water,  who  is  accustomed  to  handling  civil  cases  with  rules  of  pro- 
cedure scarcely  applicable  to  irrigation  cases,  and  who  in  the  press  of 
other  work  can  not  take  the  time  necessary  to  become  personally 
familiar  with  the  case  on  the  ground  as  well  as  in  the  court  room.     To 

r'  In  Colorado  an  "inch"  is  the  volume  which  will  pass  through  an  orifice  1  inch 
square  under  a  pressure  of  5  inches,  measured  from  the  top  of  an  orifice,  and  varies 
somewhat  with  the  number  of  "inches"  sought  to  be  measured;  38.4  inches  is  the 
accepted  equivalent  of  a  cubic  foot  per  second,  however. 

2817—  No.  118—02 6 


74 

goon  adding  reasons  for  such  a  change,  in  view  of  the  condition  of  the 
decrees  already  rendered  by  the  courts,  is  entirely  unnecessary.  If 
the  customs  and  laws  are  so  firmly  grounded  as  to  preclude  the  possi- 
bility of  the  change  indicated,  a  law  requiring  the  State  engineer  to 
examine  and  make  report  on  the  ditches  of  a  district  before  decrees 
arc  <ntered  would  meet  most  requirements.  In  the  old  districts,  how- 
ever, where  the  decrees  have  become  fixed,  the  State  engineer  should 
be  required  to  examine  each  ditch,  reservoir,  and  decree,  and  upon  his 
report  to  the  district  judge,  after  proper  hearing,  excess  decrees  should 
be  declared  abandoned. 

Enlargement  is  productive  of  more  evil  than  transfers.  Transfers 
are  open,  subject  to  examination  and  question.  Enlargement  is  a  slow, 
insiduous,  intangible  process  of  taking  more  and  more  water  from  the 
river  and  of  depriving  later  appropriators  of  benefits  which  the}'  have 
before  enjoyed.  The  simple  process  of  cleaning  a  ditch,  if  well  and 
thoroughly  done,  may  be  made  in  a  few  years  to  double  the  capacity. 
An  examination  and  record  of  the  present  ditch  capacities  would  pre- 
vent much  of  this  and  declared  abandonment,  resulting  in  practically 
a  new  set  of  decrees,  would  stop  it  altogether. 

The  decrees  all  contain  one  element  so  indefinite  that  one  is  at  a  loss 
how  at  this  time  to  apply  a  remedy,  though  in  future  decrees  this 
might  be  more  specifically  stated — that  is  the  time  element.  A  decree 
purports  to  establish  the  maximum  amount  of  water  that  can  be 
diverted  at  any  time.  It  is  left  to  conjecture,  however,  for  what  length 
of  time  the  water  is  so  run.  Under  the  conditions  existing  at  the 
time  appropriations  were  made  for  the  early  ditches,  and  extending 
even  to  the  time  of  the  decree,  the  water  was  used  quite  differently 
from  what  it  is  at  present.  The  crops  were  all  early  maturing  and 
required  little  late  water.  Now,  however,  both  early  and  late  crops 
are  raised,  the  result  being  that  instead  of  having  little  use  for  water 
after  July  it  is  now  demanded  for  August  and  September  as  well. 
Formerly  water  was  run  on  the  land  perhaps  one  week  in  the  month; 
now  with  larger  ditches,  larger  and  more  diversified  crops,  it  is  run 
every  day  in  the  month.  This,  then,  is  an  increase  in  the  length  of 
the  season  and  of  use  from  an  intermittent  to  a  continuous  flow,  with 
the  result  of  a  largely  increased  acreage  irrigated  and  actual  volume 
diverted  though  the  number  of  cubic  feet  per  second  may  be  no 
greater. 

This  enlarged  use  is  made  possible  by  the  segregation  of  the  land 
and  water  under  the  rulings  of  courts  and  brings  up  a  consideration  of 
the  fourth  item  in  the  summary  on  page  64. 

Numerous  cases  have  been  tried  in  the  State  in  which  the  right  to 
transfer  water  has  been  confirmed.  With  the  conditions  of  excess 
decrees,  it  is  to  be  expected  that  the  excess,  when  water  becomes  val- 
uable, will,  if  possible,  be  used.  The  water  becomes  an  article  of  sale 
and  purchase,  and,  while  as  stated  in  the  section  on  laws,  transfer, 


extension,  and  enlargement  are  benefits  t<>  the  community  as  a  whole, 
confiscation  of  the  property  of  the  indn  idual  results  for  the  benefit  in 
particular  of  the  holders  of  an  <>1<1  decree  and  of  the  community  in 
general.  With  decrees  more  definite  as  to  length  of  time  and  use  and 
limited  in  quantity  to  the  Deeds  of  the  land  irrigated,  transfers  would 
be  a  benefit  as  they  would  encourage  consolidation  of  ditches  and 
economy  of  use.  Conditional  decree-  could  he  granted  dependent  on 
the  completion  of  extensive  works  and  the  actual  reclamation  of  the 
land  within  a  reasonable  period. 

In  the  administration  of  the  irrigation  department,  one  must  con- 
tend with  the  acts  of  those  who  believe  themselves  to  have  been 
wronged  and  who  by  force  seek  to  maintain  their  rights,  but  discre- 
tionary power  of  the  officers  has  been  so  curtailed  and  limited  that 
they  are  often  forced  to  do  things  against  both  their  judgment  and 
inclination.  Every  irrigation  official  should  be  clothed  with  more  dis- 
cretionary power,  and  the  decisions  of  tin4  State  engineer  should  stand 
until  the  courts  deeide  adversely,  instead  of  being  overruled  by  injunc- 
tion. An  official  who  is  sworn  and  under  bonds  to  do  his  duty  is 
enjoined  from  doing  this  duty.  The  presumption  of  impartiality  is  as 
strong  in  him  as  in  a  judge;  his  ability  to  judge  of  a  case  is  superior; 
he  is  familiar  with  the  law  and  customs;  he  knows,  by  long  exercise 
of  his  duties,  the  priorities,  the  needs,  and  the  rights  of  the  ditches; 
he  knows  almost  by  instinct  the  effect  of  certain  actions  and  decisions; 
he  has  knowledge  which  neither  laws  nor  decree-,  nor  books,  nor  rec- 
ords can  give;  he  has  seen  the  effects  actually  worked  out  on  the 
ground;  he  is  vitally  interested  in  the  good  conduct  of  his  office,  and 
he  is  subject  to  immediate  removal  in  consequence  <>t'  any  misconduct. 
It  is  simply  absurd  that  the  court  should  presume  without  investiga- 
tion, and  in  ex  parte  proceedings  to  set  aside  his  ruling-. 

CONCLUSION. 

In  the  foregoing  pages,  as  far  as  possible,  facts  as  ascertained  from 
personal  observation  have  been  given,  and  criticism  of  doubtful 
points  has  been  avoided.  An  attempt  has  been  made  to  give  an  out- 
line and  something  of  a  history  and  the  sequence  of  events  which  led 
up  to  the  legal  contests,  said  by  some  to  be  only  the  beginning,  but 
which  are  more  probably  the  beginning  of  the  end.  Other  nation-  have 
had  nearly  the  same  questions  and  difficulties  to  meet,  and  found  the 
solution  of  their  troubles  and  worked  out  their  own  salvation.  With 
them  it  required  centuries  for  final  settlement.  In  the  United  States 
the  progress  made  in  Colorado  in  one  short  generation  gives  no  reason 
for  discouragement.  An  efficient  system  of  administration  has  been 
worked  out.  and  a  system  of  adjudication  ha-  been  adopted,  which 
needs  only  a  better  knowledge  of  the  requirements  of  irrigation  prac- 
tice to  make  it  satisfactory. 

O 


ImSSSIZ  0F  FLORIDA 


3  1262  08927  8997 


